Care for Wild

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
822676307
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Somis, CA, USA
Phone
8054847267
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,102,493
Expenses
$967,601
Assets
$310,068
Liabilities
$6,580

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES ROTH (President)
  • PETRONEL NIEUWOUDT (CEO)

People named in this filing

  • JAMES ROTH (President)
  • STACY ROTH (Secretary)
  • RICHARD A GROSSMAN (CFO)

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

Our mission is rooted in a holistic approach to conservation, encompassing the preservation of the rhino species and the protection of biodiversity. To achieve this, we are committed to a set of fundamental pillars that guide our work: rapid rescue, thorough rehabilitation, successful rewilding and release, proper protection, community involvement, sustainability, and by the grace of God.Our vision: Care for Wild envisions a future where viable, free-ranging populations of black and white rhinos thrive within protected, vibrant ecosystems. We strive for a susstainable development model that empowers and involves rural communities at the core of conservation efforts, ensuring the preservation of endangered species and the overall biodiversity of our planet.

What it reported doing in 2025

Anti-poaching and surveillance project- to secure free ranging african rhinoceros in protected sanctuaries across africa to ensure the survival of the species for future generations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.3%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 84.5%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12.2%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.32; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.2% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 74.3% of revenue deployed · 84.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $818K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.