Down the Stretch Ranch

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
473514272
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Creston, WA, USA
Phone
2533500160
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$294,913
Expenses
$286,648
Assets
$223,933
Liabilities
$5,771

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Daniel McCanna (Executive Dir.): $77,500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The core of Down The Stretch Ranch is to acquire retired thoroughbred race horses, giving them daily care and rehabilitation which unwinds them from their racing background. Then, in turn, utilize them to serve the community by providing similar therapeutic rehabilitation to veterans of war.

What it reported doing in 2025

Down the Stretch Ranch celebrated an extraordinary year in 2025, continuing its mission to care for retired thoroughbred racehorses and enrich the lives of its community. The ranch successfully adopted out 4 horses while maintaining an average herd count of 29. The herd roamed and grazed freely across 140 acres of land owned by the McCanna family, supplemented by purchased feed during the colder months. These accomplishments reflect the ranch's unwavering dedication to equine welfare and community impact.

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

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 55
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.7%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 89.2%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $44.14 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 2.8%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.78; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.4% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.7% of revenue deployed · 89.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $256K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $78K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.