Catnip Cats and Kittens

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
571107708
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2012, Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2011
Location
Ridgeway, SC, USA
Phone
8033483955
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Reported finances

Revenue
$42,460
Expenses
$43,104
Assets
$257,335
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Richard Van Sant (CEO/President)

People named in this filing

  • Richard Van Sant (CEO/President)
  • Loretta O'Cain (CFO/Treasurer)
  • Hollee Fulmer (Board Member)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Catnip Cats & Kittens provides housing, vet care and spay/neuter to pets in our care. We housed over 150 dogs and cats in 2020 providing a safe sanctuary and reducing unwanted pets in the community.

What it reported doing in 2025

Catnip Cats & Kittens provided housing, vet care and spay/neuter to pets in our care. We housed over 250 dogs and cats in 2022 providing a safe sanctuary and reducing unwanted pets in the community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.4%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 73.3%; rating input score 73

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.5%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.97; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 32.9% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -12.5% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 74.4% of revenue deployed · 73.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $32K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.