Doris Day Animal Foundation

Legal name: Doris Day Animal League

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954117651
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2020
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Los Angeles, CA, United States
Phone
2024521100
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$972,046
Expenses
$4,808,336
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Doris Day Animal Foundation (DDAF) is a national, nonprofit 501(c)(3) Public Charity founded in 1978 as the Doris Day Pet Foundation by legendary performer, Doris Day, with a straightforward mission that continues to this day: to help animals and the people who love them. As a grant-giving charity, DDAF funds other 501(c)(3) organizations across the United States that directly care for and protect animals. A life-long animal lover and advocate, Doris recognized that the animal welfare community in the 1970s was a sorely lacking landscape, and that through her own organization and celebrity status she could make a difference for the animals. When she initially founded the Doris Day Pet Fo.

What it reported doing in 2020

Federal legislative activity: federal affairs: ddal supported the prevent all soring tactics (past) act (h.r. 5441/s. 2295); the save america's forgotten equines (safe) act (h.r. 3355/s. 2732); the humane cosmetics act and providing responsible emergency plans for animals at risk of emerging disasters (prepared) act (h.r. 1442). Ddal also supported the puppy protection act of 2021 (h.r. 2840/s. 1385). Ddal also supported various legislative and regulatory work related to ending trophy hunting. Coalitions: coalition for consumer information on cosmetics (ccic): ddal provided funding for the steering committee for ddal, which manages the u.s. Standard for "cruelty-free" cosmetics and household products.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 8
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 98.8%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.62 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -394.7%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.8%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.7% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 98.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $4.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $197K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 14 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.