I have looked at the 990’s of both Best Friends and Maddie’s Fund extensively. Their grant page Brings up more questions than answers. There are certain humane societies and larger orgs who consistently get large sums of money given, while smaller rescues and humane orgs get $1-5K given. For example, Maddie’s fund gives the Regents of UC Davis $50K for a million pet challenge and then gives a bunch of small rescue $1K. The 990 documents leave more questions than answers. Why does Sarah Pizano’s LLC Team Shelter USA, which is similar to the Hassen model, get $160K each year? If you follow the money trail and research, huge questions arise. Thank you for deep diving into this. In my opinion, the onion is huge.
Great observations, Kelly. That's why I'm advocating for full, transparent audits of all the national organizations so we, the donors, can make informed decisions. There has been way to much smoke and mirrors.
Ed it is truly all smoke and mirrors the more you dig. The research is flawed, as noted in my comment on your more recent post, the money lines run so deep it’s concerning, and animals seem to be at the bottom of all of these peoples’ concerns. I’m new to this world as of August 2023 when I began asking questions about the 323 small pets that became snake food. I was the one to discover where they went and have spent countless hours trying to put this together. The more you learn, the worse it gets and it’s utterly devastating that sentient beings are being treated like they are with millions lining pockets of people who don’t care about them. For all the money out there, there should not be a crisis of this level.
Utilizing more open and barrier-free adoption practices had been mentioned to me by an HSUS employee; this seemed to be encouraged at their last shelter expo. I do have concerns about that because this effort can be exploited by shelters desperate to have animals moving out of the facility. We've seen what the free adoption events have resulted in. . .often animals being returned in worse shape, animals being sold on Craigslist, or dumped. These cases may be fewer than the success stories, but for those animals who are the victims of falling into bad hands, it's important to consider their safety and well being.
As a volunteer with an often overwhelmed and struggling rescue, Best Friends provides resources, networking opportunities, and attainable grants in our region. They seem to helping some shelters/rescues needing help, but there many more still in need . They do encouage partnerships between organizations which I believe is the key to saving more lives. It is easy to sit back and critique and bash, roll up your shirtsleeves and get in the trenches with those of us in rescue. You will find that no matter how good you do, someone always has something negative to say.
Liz, thank you for sharing your perspective and for your dedication to animal rescue work. I completely understand where you're coming from—I've been in the trenches of animal welfare for over 30 years, and I know firsthand how challenging and overwhelming it can be. Best Friends has provided valuable resources, networking opportunities, and support to many organizations, and their encouragement of partnerships is indeed a key strategy for saving more lives.
That said, the goal of the article is not to "bash" anyone but to call for greater transparency and accountability—to ensure that the funds being raised are truly going toward helping animals, as promised. An audit would help clarify how these resources are being allocated and address concerns that have been raised. It's about ensuring that every dollar is being used effectively to support the animals we all care so deeply about.
I appreciate your passion and your work in this field, and I believe that by working together—through both hands-on rescue and advocating for transparency—we can make a real difference.
In 2021, they prematurely declared Los Angeles a "no-kill" city after citing a short lived 90.49% save rate.
Sue Matson had done an analysis of the numbers and determined that the reason why all was rosy was because they took in less animals. Taking in less animals is the current model of success where people are being turned away at the shelter. "leave them on the street" as Ms. Hassen as declared.
We've experienced the same in Vegas, where people had been turned away. We saw an increase in dumped animals as a result. There are now practices to help counsel those who are wishing to surrender; they're asked if they would keep their animal if they could get help and there are resources provided. We'll have to wait and see how effective this is. Many of those surrendering are also doing so because they're unable to afford vet care. We know shelters are facing huge challenges, but it would seem the most obvious step would be for officials to fund spay and neuter programs - and require robust enforcement.
I've implemented a very similar program in different communities. We called it Safety Net and it was designed to help folks to keep their pets when they really wanted to. And of course you know I agree with you that spay/neuter is the only effective long term solution to today's shelter woes.
We're on the same page, Ed! I'm familiar with Safety Net; I think these resources are great for those who absolutely want to keep their pet if they can get support.
When I was in Vegas a few months ago, there were lots of electric billboards sponsored by lawyers to adopt from the shelter and lots of radio ads as well. They are making an effort that way. Please keep us informed of the progress.
They make a lot of assumptions from their data, which is unfortunate because who knows if those are the true reasons why? I'm in Florida, and private rescues are having to pick up the slack from "managed intake" public shelters, so it's a bit rich that BF is telling private rescues to do better. Instead of taking dogs from the shelters, we're taking dogs from the streets (like the shelters are supposed to do!). It's also odd they use 2019 as the reference year for their last statistic of "transfers in" instead of 2023.
We do that here to.. We used to take a mix, but the shelters and rescues up north are taking less dogs. Everyone is struggling and doing the best we can. Dumped animals are up, cruelty cases are up, and donations are down, but that was what was and is modeled by some of our politicians. Hate, disrespect and greed are in and unfortunately the animals as well as people have to suffer.
Thank you, Amber, for sharing your perspective—it's important to hear what's happening on the ground in places like Florida. I agree that making assumptions from incomplete data can be misleading, especially when it doesn’t reflect the realities faced by private rescues like yours. The point about “managed intake” public shelters shifting responsibility onto private rescues is a significant concern, and it does seem contradictory for Best Friends to critique rescues under these circumstances. The use of 2019 as a reference year is definitely puzzling—it raises questions about why they didn’t rely on more current data. Your insights really highlight the challenges of ensuring transparency and accountability in these reports!
I have looked at the 990’s of both Best Friends and Maddie’s Fund extensively. Their grant page Brings up more questions than answers. There are certain humane societies and larger orgs who consistently get large sums of money given, while smaller rescues and humane orgs get $1-5K given. For example, Maddie’s fund gives the Regents of UC Davis $50K for a million pet challenge and then gives a bunch of small rescue $1K. The 990 documents leave more questions than answers. Why does Sarah Pizano’s LLC Team Shelter USA, which is similar to the Hassen model, get $160K each year? If you follow the money trail and research, huge questions arise. Thank you for deep diving into this. In my opinion, the onion is huge.
Great observations, Kelly. That's why I'm advocating for full, transparent audits of all the national organizations so we, the donors, can make informed decisions. There has been way to much smoke and mirrors.
Ed it is truly all smoke and mirrors the more you dig. The research is flawed, as noted in my comment on your more recent post, the money lines run so deep it’s concerning, and animals seem to be at the bottom of all of these peoples’ concerns. I’m new to this world as of August 2023 when I began asking questions about the 323 small pets that became snake food. I was the one to discover where they went and have spent countless hours trying to put this together. The more you learn, the worse it gets and it’s utterly devastating that sentient beings are being treated like they are with millions lining pockets of people who don’t care about them. For all the money out there, there should not be a crisis of this level.
Kelly, I sent you an email earlier today. A mutual friend introduced us via email.
Utilizing more open and barrier-free adoption practices had been mentioned to me by an HSUS employee; this seemed to be encouraged at their last shelter expo. I do have concerns about that because this effort can be exploited by shelters desperate to have animals moving out of the facility. We've seen what the free adoption events have resulted in. . .often animals being returned in worse shape, animals being sold on Craigslist, or dumped. These cases may be fewer than the success stories, but for those animals who are the victims of falling into bad hands, it's important to consider their safety and well being.
Exactly! Well said!
As a volunteer with an often overwhelmed and struggling rescue, Best Friends provides resources, networking opportunities, and attainable grants in our region. They seem to helping some shelters/rescues needing help, but there many more still in need . They do encouage partnerships between organizations which I believe is the key to saving more lives. It is easy to sit back and critique and bash, roll up your shirtsleeves and get in the trenches with those of us in rescue. You will find that no matter how good you do, someone always has something negative to say.
Liz, thank you for sharing your perspective and for your dedication to animal rescue work. I completely understand where you're coming from—I've been in the trenches of animal welfare for over 30 years, and I know firsthand how challenging and overwhelming it can be. Best Friends has provided valuable resources, networking opportunities, and support to many organizations, and their encouragement of partnerships is indeed a key strategy for saving more lives.
That said, the goal of the article is not to "bash" anyone but to call for greater transparency and accountability—to ensure that the funds being raised are truly going toward helping animals, as promised. An audit would help clarify how these resources are being allocated and address concerns that have been raised. It's about ensuring that every dollar is being used effectively to support the animals we all care so deeply about.
I appreciate your passion and your work in this field, and I believe that by working together—through both hands-on rescue and advocating for transparency—we can make a real difference.
In 2021, they prematurely declared Los Angeles a "no-kill" city after citing a short lived 90.49% save rate.
Sue Matson had done an analysis of the numbers and determined that the reason why all was rosy was because they took in less animals. Taking in less animals is the current model of success where people are being turned away at the shelter. "leave them on the street" as Ms. Hassen as declared.
I think they spell success "o-b-f-u-s-c-a-t-i-o-n"...
We've experienced the same in Vegas, where people had been turned away. We saw an increase in dumped animals as a result. There are now practices to help counsel those who are wishing to surrender; they're asked if they would keep their animal if they could get help and there are resources provided. We'll have to wait and see how effective this is. Many of those surrendering are also doing so because they're unable to afford vet care. We know shelters are facing huge challenges, but it would seem the most obvious step would be for officials to fund spay and neuter programs - and require robust enforcement.
I've implemented a very similar program in different communities. We called it Safety Net and it was designed to help folks to keep their pets when they really wanted to. And of course you know I agree with you that spay/neuter is the only effective long term solution to today's shelter woes.
We're on the same page, Ed! I'm familiar with Safety Net; I think these resources are great for those who absolutely want to keep their pet if they can get support.
When I was in Vegas a few months ago, there were lots of electric billboards sponsored by lawyers to adopt from the shelter and lots of radio ads as well. They are making an effort that way. Please keep us informed of the progress.
They make a lot of assumptions from their data, which is unfortunate because who knows if those are the true reasons why? I'm in Florida, and private rescues are having to pick up the slack from "managed intake" public shelters, so it's a bit rich that BF is telling private rescues to do better. Instead of taking dogs from the shelters, we're taking dogs from the streets (like the shelters are supposed to do!). It's also odd they use 2019 as the reference year for their last statistic of "transfers in" instead of 2023.
We do that here to.. We used to take a mix, but the shelters and rescues up north are taking less dogs. Everyone is struggling and doing the best we can. Dumped animals are up, cruelty cases are up, and donations are down, but that was what was and is modeled by some of our politicians. Hate, disrespect and greed are in and unfortunately the animals as well as people have to suffer.
Thank you, Amber, for sharing your perspective—it's important to hear what's happening on the ground in places like Florida. I agree that making assumptions from incomplete data can be misleading, especially when it doesn’t reflect the realities faced by private rescues like yours. The point about “managed intake” public shelters shifting responsibility onto private rescues is a significant concern, and it does seem contradictory for Best Friends to critique rescues under these circumstances. The use of 2019 as a reference year is definitely puzzling—it raises questions about why they didn’t rely on more current data. Your insights really highlight the challenges of ensuring transparency and accountability in these reports!