Animal Balance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680630714
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2008
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
5413068955
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,936,782
Expenses
$1,863,495
Assets
$444,377
Liabilities
$28,037

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • EMMA CLIFFORD (BOARD MEMBER / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • EMMA CLIFFORD (BOARD MEMBER / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $102,000 total reported compensation
  • KIM DITSWORTH (BOARD DIRECTOR): $7,550 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To collaborate with communities in need to create sustainable and humane animal management programs in order to prevent suffering and ignite social change.

What it reported doing in 2024

Animal balance has expanded our ability and capacity to provide high quality, high volume spay and neuter clinics in the us and internationally to humanely manage the cat and dog populations and prevent the spread of diseases. We continue to teach the mechanics of these programs to our partners, share funding opportunities with them and encourage them to operate their own spay/neuter programs, creating a sustainable model.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 80% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 78
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.5%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 81.8%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.93 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 80%; rating input score 80; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.8%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.24; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.9%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 21.2% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 19.9% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.5% of revenue deployed · 81.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $102K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 27 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 5/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.