County Roads Rescue

Overview

Mission

The nbsp; mission nbsp; of nbsp; county nbsp; roads nbsp; rescue nbsp; is nbsp; to nbsp; assist nbsp; cherokee nbsp; county nbsp; and nbsp; other nbsp; communities nbsp; in nbsp; east nbsp; Texas nbsp; with nbsp; the nbsp; rescue nbsp; rehabilitation nbsp; and nbsp; placement nbsp; of nbsp; the nbsp; hundreds nbsp; of nbsp; forgotten nbsp; and nbsp; abandoned nbsp; stray nbsp; animals nbsp; primarily nbsp; dogs nbsp; and nbsp; cats nbsp; that nbsp; roam nbsp; the nbsp; area nbsp; we nbsp; also nbsp; educate nbsp; the nbsp; public nbsp; in nbsp; our nbsp; area nbsp; and nbsp; provide nbsp; assistance nbsp; where nbsp; it nbsp; is nbsp; needed nbsp; to nbsp; benefit nbsp; the nbsp; lives nbsp; of nbsp; companion nbsp; animals nbsp; county nbsp; roads nbsp; rescue nbsp; is nbsp; an nbsp; independent nbsp; nonprofit nbsp; organization nbsp; serving nbsp; the nbsp; animals nbsp; and nbsp; people nbsp; of nbsp; east nbsp; Texas nbsp; we nbsp; are nbsp; not nbsp; affiliated nbsp; with nbsp; the nbsp; aspca nbsp; or nbsp; any nbsp; other nbsp; humane nbsp; society nbsp; and nbsp; we

Operating model

Revenue model

Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.

Distribution model

Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

• Financial Efficiency: 64
• Transparency & Controls: 78
• Accountability: 79
• Sustainability: 33
• Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Details

• Where the money goes: 69.8% of revenue deployed · 75.2% of spending went to programs
• Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
• Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $170K in reported program spending
• Leadership: top reported pay $25K · 4 people listed
• Consistency: 19 of 24 current checks pass · 5 findings to review
• Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
• Filing history: 2 filing years from 2020 to 2024
• 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.

• Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
• High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
• Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
• Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
• Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Fund balance restriction sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
• Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX AllOtherExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
• Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
• Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
• Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.