Bayou Animal Rescue Krewe Bark

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
813137706
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Lake Charles, LA, USA
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Reported finances

Revenue
$107,614
Expenses
$191,633
Assets
$519,832
Liabilities
$1

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Lucius J Stark (President)

People named in this filing

  • Lucius J Stark (President)
  • Diana Andersen (Secretary)
  • Sharon Fusilier (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

Reduce pet overpopulation by providing low cost and free spay/neuter surgeries and vaccinations, as well as promote animal health and safety to the community.

What it reported doing in 2025

Funds were used for low to no cost spay/neuter surgeries for rescue groups and T-N-R programs(Trap-Neuter-Return)throughout Louisiana. The surgeries were conducted at the various rescue shelters or in the BARK Mobile Veterinary Unit. Services were provided to 1,264 dogs and cats through 61 events. Funds were also used to purchase a pod that was converted into a surgical suite for a nonprofit animal rescue group. The donation included the prep work and installation of the pod as well as supplies for the surgery suite.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 73% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 73% for direct work, and 27% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • 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: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -78.1%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.71; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 29.5% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 191.3% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9.6% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $186K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.