My Nonprofit Reviews

The founder would give her last dime to help every stray dog and cat she meets.

This is a great organization helping a lot of animals!

Great organization doing a lot of good for Indianapolis animals.

Well run and all funds used wisely to have the most impact on helping the dogs. Dogs are extremely well cared for and carefully placed in forever homes. Volunteer activities are well organized and the foster homes are amazing. I highly recommend supporting this organization.

The people involved in this organization are in it for the right reasons and they have helped thousands of dogs become healthy and find loving homes!

This organization of volunteers puts countless hours into helping support the Christamore House, an amazing organization that has been a benefit to our community for many decades and helped many families. The Guild raises funds for college scholarships and early education programs. Several people I know have credited their accomplishments in life with this extra help when they were young. A truly great organization worth supporting.

Excellent and highly effective organization that's changing a lot of lives for the better, as well as helping the community.

Great experience. Nice people who truly care about their animals. Great foster family, too.

We did not have a good experience at all with this organization, and it’s the first time in decades we have had a negative experience with a dog rescue. The foster parent was very nice, but the person who runs the shelter does not seem to want you to ask any questions and does not allow you to meet the dogs or introduce your dogs to a potential new dog before adopting, yet at the same time she repeatedly stated concerns about having had dogs returned. It felt like it was more of an interview about if she liked your personality than if you would be a good home for a dog in need of a home. This makes no sense – as the whole reason for a non-profit such as this is to find dogs loving and safe homes.

We had excellent references including veterinarians who have become personal friends after years of knowing us and our dogs, and have volunteered with many rescues over the past decades, have flown at our own expense down to New Orleans after Katrina to rescue dogs, and helped with animal rescue in NYC after 9/11. We are also on the board of two non-profits ourselves, one animal care facility and one addiction and homelessness resource center. Our dogs are not caged or alone during the day, eat organic food and sleep on organic, non-toxic bedding, and go on vacations with the family. They are truly the center of our lives. We go above and beyond to give our dogs the lives they deserve. We were interested in adopting a senior dog with health problems – a dog that might have a harder time finding a home - because we have time and resources to care for a dog with more needs.

Dealing with this rescue was a truly bizarre experience. I didn’t mind the extremely long and detailed application, which is fine to screen people and their references. However, to reject a good home and let a dog linger in a temporary home instead, shut in a bathroom during the day when the foster was not home – no matter how nice the foster family is, is NOT a better situation than a permanent loving home with people home all day caring for the dog’s needs. This just makes no logical sense for any rescue taking monetary donations to find homes for homeless dogs and actually wanting to put the well-being of the dogs above all else - which is the point of a good dog rescue, right?

We were at first told conflicting information about the dog, which caused us to hesitate until we obtained more information, and this seemed to be where the problems began. The dog had health and behavioral issues that we were willing to deal with, but every time I asked a question to try to get more information about the dog’s personality and health, it felt like I was somehow not following their rules and being scolded. I could hear the hardening voice tone with every additional question I asked of the director. I saved her voicemail with her stating in a strong, almost scolding, voice how she had explicitly told me previously that she doesn't allow people to meet their dogs before adopting. I would like to know who made that illogical rule? Does the board know she tells people this? Perhaps a different person on the board should be the one interacting and screening applicants so the process screens for good homes, not submissive personality traits.

It’s just really sad for the dogs, who could be placed in homes sooner, to be kept in temporary homes for no good reason - and this particular dog has still not been adopted. That costs the shelter money unnecessarily, too, when that money could be spent helping other dogs in need. It seems the mission of the founder, and possibly also the board members, has somehow diverged from rescuing dogs to just picking people they like personally who are compliant and don’t ask questions - which has nothing to do with how great a pet parent someone would be. In fact, it would seem that the more questions you ask, the more you care, the more research you do, and more likely you will be prepared to provide the best possible home for the dog. If someone didn’t care enough to ask any questions or take time to really think about the big decision to adopt a new family member, I’d be concerned they did not take the responsibility of pet ownership very seriously.

I would never discourage anyone from adopting a dog from any rescue, including this one, because after all it’s about the dogs’ well-being and not if we like or don’t like the management. But just beware of dealing with this rescue because it seems it’s more about if they like you personally than if you would be a good dog parent.