Bingham County Humane Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
300047258
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Blackfoot, ID, US
Phone
(208) 680-3881
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$167,858
Expenses
$147,349
Assets
$86,828
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRYAN WIXOM (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KELLY BOODRY (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • COLLETTE HERRICK (BOARD MEMBER)
  • TROY ECKARDT (BOARD MEMBER)
  • JENNIFER ANDREW (BOARD MEMBER)

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

To address the needs of our communities' cat overpopulation through discounted spay/neuter voucher programs, rehoming healthy, adoptable companion cats, and community education on the benefits of spay/neuter.

What it reported doing in 2025

Bchs has saved thousands of companion animal lives in bingham county Idaho through community education, a discounted spay/neuter program offered to the public, and through rescuing and sheltering unwanted orphaned or abandoned felines and preparing them for adoption. Animals received from the public are spayed or neutered prior to adoption to a new family. We also provide assistance to low income pet owners by subsidizing part of the spay and neuter fees for their animals through our discount spay/neuter voucher program, which assists to controll the overpopulation of unwanted animals.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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.
  • 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.8%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th 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: 12.2%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.59; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 87.8% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 6 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $147K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.