Bipoc in Animal Well-Being Collective
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 393458719
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Dover, DE, USA
- Rating confidence
- Limited
- Sector
- Leadership Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $75,100
- Expenses
- $3
- Assets
- $75,097
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Nadia Oseguera (President)
People named in this filing
- Nadia Oseguera (President)
- Charlotte Otero (Board Member)
- Diana Cruz (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The BIPOC in Animal Well-Being Collective BIPOC AWC is a group of Black Indigenous individuals and People of Color who are connected to animals - through work volunteer or community - and are aligned with the Collectives mission and values. The Collective exists to create emotional support and community to share and heal from harm experienced in a predominantly white-led field. We offer a space for connection and provide needed resources within our community centering and uplifting individuals from historically marginalized BIPOC communities e.g. Black Indigenous trans nonbinary or queer folks.
What it reported doing in 2025
1. Primary project was administering the Maddies Fund Scholarship Grant allowing for 63 scholars to attend EXPO conference at no-cost to themselves 2. Additional programming includes: holding a weekly one hour Zoom-based support call for any Collective member to join a safe space for connection emotional and professional support that empowers our members 3. Support for members to speak at industry conferences 4. Mutual aid support as requested
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% 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
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 83
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 100%; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 25,032.33; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- 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.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.