Cache Humane Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510187825
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Logan, UT, US
Phone
(435) 792-3920
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$807,553
Expenses
$784,031
Assets
$2,100,025
Liabilities
$31,549

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN DREW (Past President)
  • SHAWN MILNE (President)
  • LISA NISH (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • STACEY COOPMANS FRISK (Executive Dir.): $68,808 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide compassionate care, shelter, and adoption services for homeless animals in Cache County, Utah, while promoting responsible pet ownership through education and affordable spay/neuter and vaccination programs.

What it reported doing in 2024

Our Education Program seeks to educate, promote, and facilitate safe and healthy relationships between citizens of Cache Valley and companion animals. In 2024, we hosted 4 multi-day youth summer camps and a weekly junior volunteer corps. We also hosted regular community presentations and participated in outreach events at regional schools that reached over 1,800 participants. Our Volunteers provided over 4,000 hours of service helping socialize, train, and care for shelter 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.9%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 87.8%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.42 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.9%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.68; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.8%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 86.9% of revenue deployed · 87.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $688K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $69K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 28/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.