Sample Deep Research · completed September 16, 2026
Best Friends
Animal Society
Kanab, Utah · EIN 23-7147797 · Animal welfare
Visit the charity’s websiteDonor action
Proceed with reservations.
Best Friends presents a credible case for support, but the evidence does not justify an unqualified recommendation.
The organization operates at national scale, reports substantial program activity, maintains meaningful net assets and publishes outcome data showing continued movement toward fewer shelter deaths. A donor should also understand the recent operating deficits, the limits of organization-produced national impact data and the overlap between some board and paid operating roles.
In plain English: giving appears reasonable. For a large unrestricted gift, ask how leadership is managing recurring expenses and how Best Friends distinguishes its contribution from broader changes across the shelter system.
The decision at a glance
Start with what matters.
This is the donor’s orientation before the report moves into detail. Every figure below comes from the latest available Form 990, covering the year ended September 30, 2025.1
Decision orientation
What supports the recommendation, and what limits it.
A useful report does not turn a charity into one score. It shows which facts support a gift, which facts change the terms of the decision and which questions the public record cannot answer.
Scale, financial cushion and measurable movement.
Best Friends combines direct animal care with grants, shelter partnerships, data, training and advocacy. The latest filing shows a substantial asset base, and the organization publishes current national shelter outcomes that are moving in the intended direction.
The trend is positive, but attribution remains limited.
The national results depend on thousands of shelters, rescue groups, governments and adopters. Best Friends’ data help show what happened across the system, but they do not isolate how much of that change the organization caused.
A donor comfortable funding a blended national model.
An unrestricted gift supports sanctuary operations, regional programs, grants, training, advocacy, data systems and the fundraising capacity needed to sustain them. That breadth can be a strength if the donor values system change rather than one tightly bounded intervention.
A restricted or consequential gift needs a clearer use case.
If the decision depends on a specific geography, program or cost per outcome, ask for a current budget, the portion Best Friends will fund, measurable milestones and a reporting schedule before committing.
How the organization spent $1,000
A useful map, with an important limit.
For every $1,000 of total expenses reported, the filing assigns the spending this way. These categories add to exactly $1,000. They describe historical organization-wide accounting and do not promise where a future gift will go.
Financial interpretation
The balance sheet is strong. The operating trend still matters.
Best Friends reported $194.7 million in assets, $57.3 million in liabilities and $137.4 million in net assets. Liabilities therefore equaled about 29.4% of assets. That is a meaningful cushion, but it is not the same as immediately spendable cash.1
About 28.6% of net assets were donor-restricted. Unrestricted net assets equaled roughly 6.7 months of the latest annual expenses. This comparison helps a donor understand scale and resilience; it does not establish audited liquidity on the day of a gift.
Expenses exceeded revenue in each of the two latest reporting periods. The most recent deficit was relatively small compared with the organization’s scale, but the prior-year deficit was much larger. A donor should ask whether the gap reflected planned investment, timing, asset changes or a recurring mismatch between revenue and expenses.
| Measure | Reported amount | What it tells a donor |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $173.8M | Current organizational scale, not a measure of effectiveness. |
| Expenses | $175.7M | Spending exceeded revenue by $1.9M in the latest period. |
| Program services | $133.8M | 76.2% of reported expenses, based on functional accounting. |
| Fundraising | $30.3M | 17.3% of reported expenses; material enough to examine in context. |
| Management and general | $11.5M | 6.6% of reported expenses. |
| Net assets | $137.4M | A substantial cushion, part of which is restricted by donors. |
Cross-check: the filing is linked directly, and the organization’s financial archive and an independent filing index are included below.56
Investigation scope
Volume is not quality by itself. The value is in matching the right organization, separating claims from independent evidence, reconciling differences and showing what remains uncertain.
What the evidence establishes
Real strengths. Real limits.
The balance sheet provides resilience.
Assets exceeded liabilities by $137.4 million at year end. Unrestricted net assets equaled about 6.7 months of reported expenses, although that is not the same as cash on hand.1
The national outcome trend is meaningful.
Best Friends reports that 396,000 dogs and cats were killed in U.S. shelters in 2025, 34,000 fewer than in 2024. More than two-thirds of U.S. shelters reached its 90% no-kill benchmark.23
Two consecutive deficits change the funding question.
Expenses exceeded revenue by $1.9 million in the latest year and $25.1 million in the prior year. One year can reflect timing. Two years make expense growth and the path back to balance reasonable donor questions.1
National progress is not the same as causal proof.
The outcome data are relevant and encouraging, but principally produced by Best Friends. Many shelters, governments, rescue groups and adopters contribute to the national result. The available evidence does not isolate Best Friends’ share of the change.
A major Los Angeles commitment is still developing.
Best Friends and the ASPCA announced a joint, three-year $14 million initiative with Los Angeles Animal Services in 2026. The stated priorities are clear, but a donor should watch the final division of financial and operating obligations and the outcome measures reported over time.4
The six donor questions
Evidence becomes a decision only when it answers something.
Deep Research must answer all six. If the record cannot resolve one, the report says what was tried, why the gap matters and what the donor should ask next.
Where does the money actually go?
The latest filing assigns $133.8 million to program services, including $15.5 million in grants and assistance. The remaining reported expenses were $30.3 million for fundraising and $11.5 million for management and general activities. These are accounting classifications, not proof that a program worked.
How strong is the financial position?
The organization ended the year with $137.4 million in net assets and liabilities equal to 29.4% of assets. That is a meaningful cushion. The caution is direction of travel: expenses exceeded revenue in each of the two latest reporting periods, by $1.9 million in 2025 and $25.1 million in 2024.
Does the principal work appear to work?
The national shelter record moved in the intended direction. Best Friends reports 34,000 fewer dogs and cats killed in U.S. shelters in 2025, an 8.1% decline from 2024, and nearly 4 million adoptions. That is relevant outcome evidence. It does not, by itself, isolate how much of the national change Best Friends caused.
Do the records reconcile?
The latest IRS filing supports the core financial figures shown here. Public impact claims use a different reporting period and a broader national data system, so they should not be treated as a direct return on the organization’s annual spending. No material contradiction was established in the sources summarized for this example.
What material concerns should a donor know?
Seven of 11 voting board members were reported independent. Several founders or board members also received compensation for operating or consulting roles. That is disclosed, not evidence of misconduct, but it makes independence and compensation oversight worth understanding. The two-year operating deficit also deserves monitoring.
What is another dollar likely to accomplish?
An unrestricted gift supports a blended national model: sanctuary and lifesaving operations, grants to local partners, data and training, advocacy, adoption and foster programs, and fundraising needed to sustain that work. The public record does not let a donor translate one unrestricted dollar into a specific number of animals saved.
Impact evidence
Activity, outcomes and attribution are not the same thing.
The distinction matters because a high program-spending percentage can coexist with weak outcome evidence, while a costly intervention can still be highly valuable. No Halo treats each layer separately.
The national shelter trend improved.
Best Friends reports 34,000 fewer dogs and cats killed in U.S. shelters in 2025 than in 2024, an 8.1% decline, alongside nearly 4 million adoptions. The published dashboard and report provide current system-level evidence.23
Best Friends is positioned to influence that system.
The organization operates direct programs and works through a large partner network. Its role is plausibly material. The public evidence reviewed here does not calculate a counterfactual, meaning it does not show what would have happened without Best Friends.
A reliable cost per life saved.
The available record does not support dividing annual expenses by national lifesaving outcomes. Spending covers sanctuary care, grants, advocacy, data, regional work and fundraising, while the outcome count reflects work across the wider shelter system.
The Los Angeles partnership can become a testable case.
The three-year initiative has a defined geography, public partners and stated operating priorities. The useful next evidence will be a clear division of obligations, baseline measures, interim milestones and independently checkable results.4
Before a consequential gift
Three questions worth sending.
- Operating balance. What changes are expected to bring recurring revenue and expenses back into balance, and on what timetable?
- Attribution. Which independently verified outcomes can Best Friends reasonably attribute to its grants, programs or interventions rather than to the wider shelter system?
- Los Angeles commitment. What are Best Friends’ exact financial and operating obligations, what will the partner organizations fund, and which public measures will define success?
When the public record is not enough
Analyst Review turns open questions into a human diligence plan.
Deep Research gives a donor a current, sourced assessment for $19.99. Analyst Review, priced at $500, adds human judgment and targeted verification for a specific decision. An analyst reviews the complete research file, checks the evidence that matters most, reconciles material differences, pursues obtainable records and delivers a donor-specific written recommendation.
For this example, the analyst would focus on the two-year operating trend, attribution of national outcomes, governance and compensation oversight, and the terms and measurement plan for the Los Angeles commitment. Enhanced Diligence is available when the work requires broader document, transaction, related-entity or charity-outreach work.
Explore Analyst ReviewSelected source trail
Read the record behind the judgment.
This public example shows the principal records used for the conclusions displayed here. A paid report preserves claim-level citations, evidence limits and the complete dated source record.
- IRS Form 990, period ending September 30, 2025Revenue, expenses, functional expense allocation, assets, liabilities, governance disclosures, grants, compensation and staffing.
- Best Friends 2025 National Shelter Data ReportNational shelter outcomes, methodology and the organization’s definition of the no-kill benchmark.
- Best Friends shelter statistics dashboardCurrent national and local shelter data published by the organization.
- ASPCA and Best Friends Los Angeles initiative announcementTerms publicly described for the three-year, $14 million joint initiative with Los Angeles Animal Services.
- Best Friends financial information archiveThe organization’s annual reports, audited financial statements and Form 990 filings for current and prior years.
- ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer profileIndependent filing index used to cross-check identity, filing history and high-level financial figures.
- CharityWatch Best Friends profileIndependent evaluator context on fundraising, governance, compensation and disclosures, reconciled against the underlying filing.
Research a charity you care about
Get the evidence. Then make the decision.
Search the public record for free. When the decision matters, use one $19.99 research credit for a fresh Deep Research investigation. Reports remain private to the purchasing account unless the customer chooses to share one.
Start with a charityHow Deep Research works