Alpha K9 Service Program

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
461388519
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015, Form 990-N 2012
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
9164004337
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Student Sororities, Fraternities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$640,463
Expenses
$556,760
Assets
$121,397
Liabilities
$188

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KEVIN CAMERON (PRESIDENT/CHIEF EXECUTIVE)

Highest reported compensation

  • JUSTINE BORGHELLO (SECRETARY): $10,470 total reported compensation
  • JACKIE PFISTER (CHIEF OPERATIONS OFFICER): $2,444 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Alpha k9 is a combat disabled veteran run non-profit organization dedicated to the principle of providing highly skilled and effective service dogs and working dogs to those whose lives depend on them.decades of military service and real world experience has allowed the alpha k9 team to witness firsthand the difficulties veterans and those with physical and psychological disabilities face. These experiences are the driving force behind the organization and the reason it adheres to the highest standards of training and ethics in the industry based on department of defense training standards.

What it reported doing in 2015

Trained and donated 70 service dogs, 2 working dogs and 1 police dog in 2015 to those whose lives depend on them.deemed subject mater experts by the California state senate for service dogs, working dogs, and their training and utilization.consecutively won award for being the top canine training facility in northern California.provided dogs to veterans, first responders, battered women and children in 36 states.the organization does not measure its success solely by providing service dogs and working dogs but by the over 1,000 family members it has helped save; by helping them have an opportunity at a normal life. The organization continues to be recognized as a leader by serving veterans, first-responders, women and children across the united states.all of these 2015 program service accomplishments have significantly contributed to the organizations primary tax-exempt purpose and its mission.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 73% for direct work, and 27% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 61
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.6%; rating input score 64
  • Program expense ratio: 73.2%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.16 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.1%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.22; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.3%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 78% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 64% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 105.6% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.6% of revenue deployed · 73.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $407K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $10K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2014 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 11/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.