Animal rescue flight charities portray themselves as lifelines for pets at risk of euthanasia in overcrowded shelters, tugging at potential donors’ heartstrings with powerful images of volunteer pilots airlifting dogs, cats, and other vulnerable animals out of disaster areas and overcrowded shelters and into the arms of loving adopters. Yet behind the heartwarming imagery of furry passengers flying to safety, troubling questions have emerged about how some of these organizations are run, how donor money is spent, and whether the feel-good stories match financial and operational realities.
“…we are being penalized with an F trying to improve our rating…You won’t remove us. So all we can do is try to improve our rating within your algorithm.”
CharityWatch received the above message from New York-based Pilots to the Rescue founder and executive director, Michael Schneider, in October 2024. At the time his charity received a failing grade from CharityWatch based on our analysis of its 2022 financial reporting. We found that it spent only 34% of its cash expenses on its programs and that it cost the charity $50 to raise each $100 of donations that year.
Pilots to the Rescue has since slightly improved its rating from an “F” to a “D” on CharityWatch’s “A+” to “F” rating scale, spending 47% of its $2.1 million expenses on its programs in 2023. The charity’s two largest reported expenses that year were “postage” at $467,177, and “printing” at $223,665. Its audit of the same year disclosed that the charity incurred $840,722 of “joint costs” from a combined educational and fundraising campaign conducted via direct mail.
By contrast, Pilots to the Rescue’s largest purely program-related expenses in 2023 were $136,188 of salaries, benefits, and payroll taxes; depreciation of $95,530; and “flight expenses” of $92,792. In other words, Pilots to the Rescue spends far more working with fundraisers to send out direct mail letters asking for donations than it does on animal rescue missions.
South Carolina-based Pilots N Paws is smaller than most of the organizations CharityWatch rates in terms of annual revenue, taking in an average of only $525,000 per year in contributions between 2020 – 2024, according to tax records. However, because it consistently raises more money than it spends year after year, CharityWatch found that it could continue to operate at 2024 spending levels for more than 14.4 years without raising an additional penny of revenue. For example, Pilots N Paws’ expenses ranged from only $181,347 to $261,247 annually during reporting years 2020 through 2024. As of the end of 2024 it had amassed cash reserves of nearly $3.5 million.
CharityWatch is concerned about how these funds may eventually be used given the organization’s lacking governance. Pilots N Paws reports in its 2024 tax filing that its governing body consists of only 4 board members, of which only 3 are reported as “independent” according to IRS standards. It also reports that it does not maintain written whistleblower or document retention and destruction policies. While the charity reports having a written conflict of interest policy, concerningly, it also reports that its officers, directors, trustees, and key employees were not required to annually disclose interests that could give rise to conflicts, and that the policy was not regularly and consistently monitored or enforced. The charity’s books have never been audited by an independent accountant, according to tax records.
CharityWatch reached out to Pilots N Paws’ Executive Director, Kathleen Quinn, and President, Deborah Boies, in July 2025 asking about the organization’s plans for these reserves, also inquiring if the charity has plans to suspend its fundraising efforts given that it seems unable to spend the donations it has already accumulated.
It is important to note that this charity does not directly conduct animal rescues. Rather, its stated mission is to provide “a web based forum in which individuals and organizations can communicate for the purpose of transporting animals in need of movement from one location to another in the form of general and commercial aviation.” While this may be a useful service, over time this charity has raised far more revenue than what it costs to provide it. This being the case, we also asked Pilots N Paws if its board of directors has considered granting excess funds to other animal rescue charities that could put them to use in their current programs. CharityWatch has not received a response to our inquiry.
In the 5-year period of 2020-2024, Wyoming-based charity Dog Is My CoPilot reports raising over $9.5 million in donations. Given the amount of public dollars involved, CharityWatch finds its lack of good governance procedures, transparency, and accountability extremely concerning. For example, it reports that its financial statements were not audited by an independent accountant (in the financial years 2020-2024 checked by CharityWatch), which is unusual for a charity of this size. In its fiscal 2024 tax filing the charity also reports that it does not make its governing documents, conflict of interest policy, or financial statements available to the public, and that it does not require its board members to annually disclose interests that could give rise to conflicts. It states, “No review was or will be conducted” in response to the tax form question, “Describe on Schedule O the process, if any, used by the organization to review this Form 990.”
Unlike the self-reported IRS tax Form 990, external financial statement audits are conducted by independent Certified Public Accountants (CPAs) according to Generally Accepted Auditing Standards (GAAS). Auditors test key internal controls and sample transactions, tracing them to source documents (invoices, checks, journals, ledgers) and running analytics to spot anomalies. Based on this work, they issue an opinion on whether the statements follow Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). That independent testing makes audited statements far more reliable and better at surfacing risks of error, fraud, or misappropriation than tax forms alone.
Basing your giving decisions on what a charity reports about itself in its tax Form 990, or on charity ratings based on those documents, amounts to just taking the charity’s word for it that it is spending your donations the way it claims it will. Until Dog is my CoPilot submits itself to an independent audit, that goes for this charity as well.
CharityWatch identified a troubling history of separate legal disputes between the California-based Wings of Rescue (Wings) and two of its former officers, CFO Damian Cross, and its co-founder and president, Yehuda Netanel. The charity reports spending $276,170 on legal fees during 2017-2022, according to its tax filings for those years—though details breaking out fees related to each case are not in the public record.
The lawsuit between Wings of Rescue and Cross centered on allegations of financial misconduct and a disputed loan. In its legal Complaint, Wings accused Cross of embezzling funds, charging personal expenses to the charity’s credit cards, and improperly withdrawing nearly $45,000 from its bank account. It further alleged that Cross borrowed $100,000 from the organization under the promise of repayment but defaulted after making only a single $12,500 payment. Wings sought damages for breach of contract, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and rescission of the loan agreement, ultimately claiming losses exceeding $90,000 plus additional damages and attorneys’ fees.
Cross denied wrongdoing and maintained that certain expenses and transactions were legitimate or authorized in the course of his work with the charity. He disputed the claims of fraud and fiduciary breach, framing the dispute as one of contractual disagreement and inadvertent use of charity credit cards rather than intentional misconduct. Ultimately, the case concluded in May 2022 with a stipulated dismissal (without admission of liability), bringing the litigation to a close without a trial. The charity’s 2023 audited financial statements reflect that the total judgment amounted to $115,000 and that Wings received final payment in 2022.
Wings of Rescue began in 2011 when co-founders Yehuda Netanel and Cynthia Smith set out to fly at-risk pets to no-kill shelters. After the group’s first plane crashed in 2015, Netanel put in about $535,000 from insurance proceeds and helped secure a $1.4 million bank loan so the charity could buy a Pilatus PC-12 airplane, titled to Wings and backed by his personal guarantee.
As new directors joined the charity in 2015–2016, tensions escalated. In court papers, Wings described Netanel as domineering and an unsafe pilot, while Netanel said he was unfairly smeared and pushed out. He resigned in March 2017. The dispute that followed centered on who controlled the plane. Wings argued that their agreement was that Netanel could only take the aircraft back if the board fired him, not if he left voluntarily, and accused him of inserting a “resignation” option for himself into board minutes retroactively. Netanel countered that the board had already approved his right to reclaim the plane if he left, so long as he repaid the principal of the loan and covered taxes and fees, and that Wings devalued the aircraft after he stepped down. From 2017 to 2021 the sides traded lawsuits and counterclaims, then dropped the case in late 2021, settling without a judge deciding who was right.
[The dispute between Wings of Rescue and Damian Cross was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court under case number 198TCV44612 (Wings of Rescue, Inc., a California Non-Profit Corporation v. Damian Cross). A separate case involving Wings of Rescue and Yehuda Netanel was also filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court under case number LC105556 (Yehuda Netanel v. Wings of Rescue)]
Earlier this year CharityWatch reported on the financial irregularities we identified at the animal sanctuary D.E.L.T.A. Rescue. Our investigation revealed more than $2.5 million in unaccounted-for donations between the charity and two of its related organizations, as well as questions about the completeness and reliability of its financial reporting. During our more recent investigation into Wings of Rescue, we uncovered another case of unaccounted-for funds.
CharityWatch analyzed the 2023 tax filing of Wings of Rescue (IRS Form 990, Schedule I), and found that $735,562, or about 85%, of the charity’s total grants of $868,167 went to a charity called Fetch. This grant accounted for more than 100% of Fetch’s total revenue for the year, according to that charity’s tax filing—Fetch reports raising only $643,800 in total contributions that year. So what happened to $91,762 in donations?
Fetch reports that its governing body consists of only 3 people, two of whom are married to each other, and that it engaged in a transaction in the amount of $561,000 with the company of one of its directors related to “aircraft lease.” It also reports that its books were not audited by an independent accountant, that it does not maintain conflict of interest, whistleblower, or document retention and destruction policies, and that it does not make its governing documents available to the public. While it’s possible the $91,762 discrepancy is just a reporting error, the charity’s lacking governance creates an elevated risk that its assets are not adequately protected from theft or other misuse.
CharityWatch reached out to both charities via U.S. mail and email in mid-March 2025 with this and other questions, but neither charity provided answers. This discrepancy is particularly concerning given that both Wings of Rescue and Fetch have small boards of directors, lack basic governance policies related to conflicts of interest, whistleblowers, and document retention and destruction, and that the financial statements of Fetch were not audited by an independent CPA, according to the charities’ tax filings. In addition, Wings of Rescue’s 2023 tax filing reflects that its president, Ric Browde, and treasurer/secretary, Holly Browde, are married—the two comprise half of the charity’s four-person governing body, raising serious concerns that there is no independent person in a position of authority at the organization capable of acting as a check against any suspicious transactions or significant financial decisions.
CharityWatch also identified a red flag in Wings of Rescue’s financial reporting that could indicate it is overstating how much it really accomplishes with the donations it receives. The charity claims in its 2023 tax filing that it spent $0 on fundraising in 2023, yet somehow managed to raise $2,679,221 in donations that year. Prior year reporting similarly shows the charity claiming that it spent absolutely nothing to raise over $2 million in donations in 2022 and $1.4 million in 2021.
Even small charities that rely entirely on volunteers to raise donations typically incur at least some fundraising costs, such as printing, postage, mailing, phone, office, or internet expenses. Paid officers reported in Wings of Rescue’s 2023 tax filing include Ric Browde, president, and Ashley Wright, executive director, each earning $95,000 and $91,458 in total compensation, respectively. Based on 2023 financial reporting, Wings is claiming that neither officer spent even a small amount of staff time asking for donations, overseeing any volunteer fundraisers, or coordinating grants to the organization. When CharityWatch asked Wings for an explanation for how it could raise millions in donations without spending even one penny on paid staff time or other expenses to do so, we did not receive a response.
CharityWatch also asked Wings of Rescue to shed some light on its overall financial operations. One customer represented 84% of its 2023 animal transportation revenue of $738,804, according to its audit and tax filing of the same year. CharityWatch asked Wings for the name of this customer with the goal of reconciling the financial reporting between the two organizations.
On the expense side, Wings of Rescue paid $731,306 to a Texas-based company by the name of Berry Aviation for “Charter Services,” while reporting total “chartered rescue flight” expenses of $843,173 for the year. Payments to the company accounted for 37% of the charity’s reported 2023 program spending. We asked Wings of Rescue to confirm that no interested party at the charity has a financial or other interest in Berry Aviation. The charity did not provide responses to our questions.
Taken together, our findings point to a sector where soaring imagery too often outpaces sound stewardship: Pilots to the Rescue spends more soliciting donations than rescuing animals; Pilots N Paws banks years of reserves while skimping on governance; Dog Is My CoPilot foregoes independent audits despite multimillion-dollar fundraising; and Wings of Rescue presents multiple red flags—from costly legal disputes and unaccounted for donations, to dubious claims of raising millions in donations without spending anything to do so.
Donors shouldn’t have to accept glossy photos in place of accountability. Before you give, look for audited financial statements, truly independent boards (with conflict-of-interest, whistleblower, and records policies), transparent grant trails that reconcile across recipients, realistic fundraising costs, and program spending that matches the mission. Until these charities resolve the concerns outlined here, animal lovers who want their dollars to save lives—not subsidize mailers, legal fights, or weak controls—should instead consider directing their support to charities that meet those standards today.
As the only independent charity watchdog organization in the United States, CharityWatch relies on your support to fund our in-depth research and analysis in order to bring you the unbiased charity ratings and other information you rely on to help you make more informed giving decisions. We are not directly or indirectly funded by nonprofit industry interests.
We hope you will consider making a donation today so that we can continue to speak openly and critically and call out wrongdoing when we see it without concern for special interests cutting our funding. CharityWatch is a small organization and your donations are noticed, needed, and greatly appreciated. Thank you for giving wisely!
