Animal Care Sanctuary

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
221837635
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-PF 2017
Location
East Smithfield, PA, USA
Phone
5705962200
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,487,787
Expenses
$2,793,729
Assets
$7,507,307
Liabilities
$728,916

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TERRI MCKENDRY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • TERRI MCKENDRY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $215,300 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Animal care sanctuary's lifesaving mission as a no kill organization envisions a community that promotes turning compassion into action for companion animals by: 1.) adopting healthy pet companions into loving homes. 2.) promoting the human-animal bond through outreach, education and advocacy. 3.) spaying and neutering to end the suffering and overpopulation of unwanted animals.

What it reported doing in 2024

1) cattery - resident acs cats are provided wth multiple types of enrichment designed to stimulate the personality and drive of each cat. Communal living spaces provide the cats with the companionship and stimulation of other cats, enabling the opportunity for play, interaction, mutual grooming, and other normal cat behaviors. These environments are also furnished with shelves, tunnels, bookshelves, chairs, and other items designed to allow cats to climb, hide, and sleep as they would in a household environment. They also have access during morning hours to a "catio" that is open seasonally; a screened-in porch provides access to fresh air, bird and bug watching, and new and interesting smells. Acs provide toys, scratching posts and cat towers for additional enrichment, and several times each month, catnip is distributed for their enjoyment. We also dispense treats once weekly in a scattering method intended to stimulate the cats' hunting instincts. The intention of the barn cat program is to provide a life-saving avenue for those cats that are at risk of death in the environment or euthanasia in a municipal shelter. While these animals are technically "safe" in our shelter because we don't euthanize them, they are also living a life that is undesirable to them. The constant presence of humans and the necessary evils of grooming and cleaning that put them in contact with us are very stressful to them, and can not only result in a lower quality of life for the animal, but also increased risk of disease. Our foster care program has expanded and several cats went into foster homes, mostly bottle babies. A new program is our felv program. Shelters test cats for felv and if positive they uthanize. Working with cornell and austin pets alive we now pull felv cats from other shelters. They can live a normal life, just not be housed with other cats. We have adopted many and will continue to educate about why these cats do not need to be euthanized.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 67% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.4%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 67.4%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -12.3%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.69; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.7%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.4% of revenue deployed · 67.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $215K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.