Citizens League for Animal Welfare
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 201868795
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2011–2016
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2016
- Location
- Canton, TX, USA
- Phone
- 2148030322
- Rating
- 46
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Animal Protection and Welfare
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $15,101
- Expenses
- $25,895
- Assets
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Mindi Holland (President)
People named in this filing
- Mindi Holland (President)
- Dana Tucker (Director)
- Susan Matassa (Director)
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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
C.L.A.W. provides foster homes and facilities and permanent adoptions for rescued pets. It provides medical care, spays and neuters, age appropriate shots and microchipping for those animals in pre-adoption status. It follows up on adopted pets to assure their acceptance in the new home. It effectively advertises in local media, on its website and on PetFinder.com to accomplish these goals. It educates the community on the values of spay and neuter. It educates the public schools about correct ways to care for pets.
What it reported doing in 2016
Veterinary, Microchipping, Adoption, Spay/Neuter and Education of the community regarding their pets.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 25
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 11
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 30%; rating input score 30
- Program expense ratio: 17.5%; rating input score 17
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -71.5%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -21% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -32.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 30% of revenue deployed · 17.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2011 to 2016
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 30/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 17/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.