Animal Advocates of North Texas

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263789328
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2025
Location
Keller, TX, USA
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Reported finances

Revenue
$108,297
Expenses
$79,560
Assets
$68,062

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Fiona Green (Director)
  • Christina Ryder (Treasurer)
  • Danielle Auclair (Secretary)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We are an animal rescue group. We pull dogs and cats from shelters that are sick or going to be euthanized. We vet them by treating any illness they may have give them all their vaccinations and spay neuter. All animals are then put into foster homes. We also board animals with a trainer if they have problems with other dogs or people until they are deemed adoptable. We also work with our community in making them aware how important it is to have your animal vetted. All of the donations we receive are put towards the care of animals.

What it reported doing in 2025

Vetting for all animals is our main expense. This vetting includes exams meds surgery

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.1%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 77.7%; rating input score 78

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 26.5%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.86; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.4% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 49.9% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 57.1% of revenue deployed · 77.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $62K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.