Dhole Conservation Fund
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 822556312
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2019–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2021
- Location
- San Degio, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8584055801
- Rating
- 42
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Protection of Endangered Species
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,497
- Expenses
- $3,297
- Assets
- $10,678
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Chelsea Davis (CEO)
People named in this filing
- Chelsea Davis (CEO)
- Sandra Gonzalez (Secretary)
- Bonnie McDonald (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
We are dedicated to preventing the dhole (cuon alpinus) from going extinct. We do this by providing funding for research on the ground conservation efforts while also providing free education and awareness programs.
What it reported doing in 2025
The Dhole Conservation Fund supports conservation of the endangered dhole (Cuon alpinus) through direct project funding, education, and outreach. In 2025, the organization provided a $3,000 grant to support field-based conservation efforts in Nepal, including human-wildlife conflict mitigation and ecological monitoring. Additional funds supported public awareness, educational initiatives, and outreach activities, as well as the development of sustainable fundraising through merchandise sales. These efforts contribute to long-term conservation impact by supporting local partners and increasing global awareness of dhole conservation.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 90% 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. 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: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 77
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 40%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.24; rating input score 76; 76th 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: 19.1% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 15.5% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.