Canine Partners for Life

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
232580658
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Cochranville, PA, USA
Phone
6108694902
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,616,116
Expenses
$1,663,136
Assets
$6,831,843
Liabilities
$171,415

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEPHEN PIETRZAK (President)
  • WALTER GRIFFITTS (President (Until May 2025))
  • KATE SCHROEDER (Vice President)
  • JENNIFER MADDEN (Vice President (Until May 2025))
  • JANE CRAMER (Executive Director (Until 6/16/25))

Highest reported compensation

  • JANE CRAMER (Executive Director (Until 6/16/25)): $106,491 total reported compensation
  • Alicia Spoto (Business Manager): $60,460 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of Canine Partners For Life is to increase the independence and quality of life of individuals with physical, developmental, and cognitive disabilities or who are in other situations of need. We achieve our mission by providing and sustaining professionally trained service and companion dogs.

What it reported doing in 2024

TRAINING AND FOLLOW UP - professional Canine Partners for Life Trainers teach dogs to master more than 40 commands and specialize their training to meet the needs of a recipient with a disability or people who are in other situations of need. We train dogs as full service dogs, medical alert dogs, and companion dogs. Canine Partners for Life also provides lifetime follow up support for our graduates. CPLs follow up program helps to ensure that the service or companion dog is still meeting the recipients needs and that the team still meets the standards set by CPL and Assistance Dogs International. If a recipients needs change or additional training support is needed, CPL staff answers questions and provides additional training.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.1%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 79.7%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.1 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.9%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.11; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.8% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.1% of revenue deployed · 79.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $106K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.