Carver Scott County Humane Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411638325
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Chaska, MN, USA
Phone
9523683553
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$809,535
Expenses
$645,600
Assets
$1,349,615
Liabilities
$35,798

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALYSE ARRAS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • ANGELA PRICE (PRESIDENT)
  • ANGELA FUNDERBURG (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALYSE ARRAS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $79,063 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Connecting animals in need with people who care.

What it reported doing in 2024

Through our foster and adoption program, we rescue, house, care for, and re-home unwanted and homeless canine and feline companion animals. Until they are adopted, cats and kittens live in foster homes, at our adoption and wellness center, or at an adoption center located within one of our participating local pet supply stores. Dogs live in foster homes and are adopted directly from those homes. While in our care, all animals receive high-quality veterinary care, including sterilization surgery, food, behavioral support, and other items and services needed to prepare them for their adoptive homes.we also provide ongoing support, including resources and advice, to our adopters to help ensure they are set up for success from the moment they bring home their new pet.

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.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.7%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 69.7%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.98 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.3%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.09; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.2%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.7% of revenue deployed · 69.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $450K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $79K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 6/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.