My Nonprofit Reviews

I give to several animal rescue/ rehabilitation groups ranging from Center for Biological Diversity (U.S.) to Animal Aid (India) to IAR (International Animal Rescue based in U.K. but right now strongest presence is in Indonesia doing incredible work helping rescue orphaned Orangutans). I used to try to assess if a charity was "donation worthy" based on ratings given out by organizations such as Charity Navigator and Charity Watch. However, the reality is that some groups simply do not meet the matrix that these watchdogs groups require to be rated (or more likely the rating systems used are so incredibly narrow and concentrate on very rigid criteria as is perfectly illustrated in peer review Stanford Social Innovation Review, "The Ratings Game," Summer of 2005, that many really great charities look terrible on paper and thus do not volunteer). As such, I go back to relying on what many people relied on for hundreds of years before charity watchdog groups existed; Worth of mouth.

Hope for Paws receives so much attention, almost all very very positive, that I find it very hard to believe that Eldad Hagar is running some kind of sham. The ONLY negative feedback that I have seen about the organization seems to be the repetition of the SAME "observation"(that is a very generous use of the word within the context of what they said about Mr. Hagar). The initial "report" came from a Facebook in 2013 page titled The Good, The Bad, and The Unforgivable of Animal Cruelty.

Then later that same year FreeNewsPos "reported" about "Many rumors have surrounded Eldad Hagar and his Hope for Paws rescue for the last few years now," which was just a regurgitation of the Facebook page The Good, The Bad, and The Unforgivable of Animal Cruelty which talked about "rumors" of Eldad receiving $15,000 in donations to rescue 100 dogs which it purport that were life "to die." The "news article" offers absolutely no support for its allegations making one of the first sentences about "many rumors" an accurate description of its own "article."

The only evidence offered was a reference to a court case July 7, 2010, in a lawsuit for nonpayment to Top Dog Resort for boarding fees, Hope for Paws lost. After researching this further I found out that that the complaint originates in what is known as the Palmdale Arizona Dogs. In 2010 Mr. Hagar and his former partner Sharon Gold discovered the gruesome site of over 100 dogs on a property in the desert where they were dying of hunger, of thirst, neglect...Hagar and Gold stepped up to help all of the dogs. A monumental task for such a fledgling organization (they had only been formed since the very end of 2008 according to Charity Navigator profile). They likely took on more than they could financially and logistically handle, thus the inability to pay Top Dog Resort for some of the rescued dogs brought to them. This "article" also report that Ms. Gold has since gone to jail for "embezzlement." I scoured everything I could about Ms. Gold but was not able to find the legal case. I was able to see, however, that whatever happened with Ms. Gold she is no longer involved with Hope for Paws and apparently has not been for some time. She may very well have embezzled money, I do not know as I could not find the court case or the ruling.

The opinion pieces written about the Palmdale Arizona Dogs and Ms. Gold would have kept me from donating had I not researched the issue further. The allegations of calling the founder of Hope for Paws a "fraud" all seem to be based upon that initial Facebook page that "reported" its impression of the Palmdale Arizona Dogs. The whole "article" is an opinion piece. What became more disturbing is when I dug even a little deeper and decided I should research the entity behind the strident attacks against Hope for Paws and found that the individual who has made some of the loudest attacks against Hope for Paws is herself under investigation for animal hoarding and cruelty. I had heard that there is an underbelly in the world of animal rescue and that rather than working together groups can find themselves at each others throats because they are in such desperate need of donations that some get to the point of feeling like the only way to survive another day is to undermine its "competition," and often times the groups struggling to survive will band together, so to speak in an attempt to take down a group, or groups , that are doing exceptionally well. I never ever believed that anyone involved with helping animals COULD EVER behave in such a way. I was so wrong.

What is nice to see though is that Hope for Paws has survived these attacks, at least so far they have. They continue to focus on their work. When I watch these videos I do not feel manipulated. This guy obviously loves these creatures. I read some posts where people state that they feel quality of the video and the music proves the point that Hope for Paws' focus is on getting money by enticing people through high quality video. Really? He takes video that are pretty darn close in "production value" to what I am able to capture on my phone. Then he attaches music to it before uploading to his site. So, let's get honest about THAT. I don't know of any 13 year old who cannot do the exact same thing with his or her smartphone and a desktop. The fact is that it is NOT how he captures these rescues on video it is HOW HE RESCUES these abandoned creatures that nobody else wants, that everyone else has ignored for weeks, months, years, that nobody else wants to crawl around in sewers or garbage dumps for, and that some people did not really have a problem with Mr. Hagar doing until his videos started to become popular.

The first wave of negative commenting came at the end of 2013. All of the commenting was based on opinions about Mr. Hagar and the Palmdale Arizona dogs rescue in 2010. People (other "rescue groups" maybe?) did not make public grievances against Hope for Paws until 3 years after the "problem." What seems most significant is that Hope for Paws did not begin receiving this criticism until after mainstream media began writing positive stories the organization and Mr. Hagar .


As far as donations are concerned, from what I have read Hope for Paws is a solid charity. It seems to have a built a really good network of fosters and rescues (which oddly its critics think is a bad thing. Perhaps they are not update with newer models that show that the traditional stand-alone brick and mortar "shelter" is not necessarily the best way. The most successful groups out there are networks of volunteers). What I also like is that Hope for Paws takes on the grooming and MEDICAL costs of the animals that it rescues, and if the handful of videos I have watched of the many sickly dogs living in deplorable conditions is any indication, those initial medical costs must seem overwhelming. Indeed, I did read an interview with Mr. Hagar and his wife and they had acknowledged that the medical costs are "astronomical." It does not seem quite fair to criticize Hope for Paws for not being a full service rescue group as they have never identified themselves as such. They are the first stage in the rescue process a stage that is often times the most expensive for dogs that are coming in physically ill.

I feel confident about donations I have given them. The one thing that I would not mind seeing would be a more specific breakdown of how much it spends on those initial emergency grooming and medical bills. I think showing those numbers would be very worthwhile and would be helpful in curbing the effects of what really is seeming more and more like baseless attacks and Mr. Hagar and his charity.