Canines With a Cause
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 274402344
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Salt Lake City, UT, USA
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Animal Protection and Welfare
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $427,787
- Expenses
- $328,281
- Assets
- $322,452
- Liabilities
- $875
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Antoinette Carter (President)
- Jennifer Booth (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Cathy King (Executive Dir.): $96,868 total reported compensation
- Justyn Manley (Director): $8,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of Canines With a Cause is to harness the untapped potential of shelter dogs to heal emotional and psychological wounds, provide unconditional love, support and companionship, and give a new leash on life to those in need through assistance, therapy or service dog work. Making a difference, one person and one dog at a time!
What it reported doing in 2025
Transforming two lives at once, Canines With a Cause (CWAC) pairs rescued dogs with veterans affected by PTSD (PTSD), TBI, and MST, offering complimentary, personalized training classes to form psychiatric service dog teams. To accomplish this, CWAC begins by identifying suitable canine candidates from local animal shelters and rescue organizations. We select dogs with the ideal temperament and traits, then adopt and place them in either our prison program, a foster home, or, in some cases, the veteran-in-waiting. This pre-training process prepares both the dog and the veteran for a successful partnership. CWAC also collaborated with the Walter Reed Military Hospital Soldier Rehabilitation Program and the Uniformed Services University's Wounded Warrior Service Dog Program, working to facilitate the provision of service dogs to military beneficiaries and veterans. This partnership aimed to share best practices in service dog training and education. Unfortunately, the program faced setbacks, including the suspension of the Utah prison program due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the termination of the Walter Reed program's funding in 2025 due to budget cuts. This has forced CWAC to focus on community-based initiatives, like the newly established Paw Squad foster program. This program brings rescued dogs into loving Utah homes, emphasizing teamwork - a concept familiar to military personnel. Much like our prison programs, this helps bridge the gap between adoption and placement, ensuring a smooth transition for canines awaiting pairing with veterans.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 99% 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.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 57
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 82
- Sustainability: 54
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 53.7%; rating input score 54
- Program expense ratio: 69.6%; rating input score 70
- Fundraising efficiency: $10 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
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: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 23.3%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.98; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 31.9%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 18.9% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 53.7% of revenue deployed · 69.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $228K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $97K · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 37/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.