Bay Area Cats

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
882869965
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Cupertino, CA, USA
Phone
4083848694
Rating
49
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Reported finances

Revenue
$398,834
Expenses
$305,710
Assets
$115,602
Liabilities
$11,120

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Vanessa Forney (President)

People named in this filing

  • Vanessa Forney (President)
  • Dinah Hayes (Secretary)
  • Tina McAlister (Treasurer)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Bay Area Cats provides resources and enables the community to do trap-neuter-return TNR. We spend time training educating rescuing kittens and assisting with TNR efforts. For high risk cats and kittens we treat spay or neuter and foster these cats until ready for adoption. Cats and kittens are adopted to loving homes.

What it reported doing in 2025

Cat and kitten adoption. We intake cats and kittens from high risk situations. We provide medical care spay or neuter and a foster environment until they are able to be adopted.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 85% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 31
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 31.2%; rating input score 31
  • Program expense ratio: 40.7%; rating input score 41
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 80%; rating input score 80; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 23.3%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.38; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 31.2% of revenue deployed · 40.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $124K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 38 of 40 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX AllOtherExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.