Animal Friends for Life

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200686565
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
Asheville, NC, USA
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Veterinary Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$17,267
Expenses
$176,503
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LEAH CRAIG FIESER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • DONN GASH (PRESIDENT)
  • KATHY MEDL (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MIEKE BENEPE (MEMBER)
  • LEAH CRAIG FIESER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • DONN GASH (PRESIDENT)

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

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To rescue, rehabilitate and rehome senior and special needs companion animals. A home-like, cage-free, lifelong sanctuary is provided for every animal that enters the program.

What it reported doing in 2019

During late 2018 and 2019, all animals were moved to the care of brother wolf animal rescue (bwar) in asheville nc. During the 2019 tax year, animal friends for life was working to transfer all assets and property to bwar. The animals and assets were transferred in an effort to provide the best care for the animals and best uses of the assets at a more stable nonprofit organization. All program expenses incurred in 2019 were a part of closing down the entity for the merger with bwar.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% 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 available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 10
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 23.3%; rating input score 23
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -922.2%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.4% per year; rating input score 0; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 23.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $41K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2010 to 2019
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.