Finney County Humane Society Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 481197716
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2014
- Location
- Garden City, KS, USA
- Phone
- 6205211036
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Animal Protection and Welfare
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $856,245
- Expenses
- $1,129,864
- Assets
- $2,896,759
- Liabilities
- $262,175
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DEBBIE REYNOLDS (PRESIDENT)
- MARY EVES (VICE PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- DEBBIE REYNOLDS (PRESIDENT)
- MARY EVES (VICE PRESIDENT)
- JEFF CLARK (FINANCIAL SECRETARY)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our mission is to save and improve the lives of small animals and pets. We do this through education, facilitating animal adoption, spay and neuter programs, and animal transport.
What it reported doing in 2025
Management and recruitment of voluteers to perform various functions at the animal shelter. These include volunteer drivers for rescue transports, volunteers to help with fund-raising, and volunteers to help with testing dogs, arranging for medical treatments, etc. The society also conducts low cost spay/neuter and vaccination clinics for the general public. Volunteers and staff provide education about pet care by doing presentations at local schools, service clubs, and other organizations. Volunteers and staff also participate in adoption events at local pet supply stores. Operation of the finney county animal shelter. This includes care of animals picked up by animal control and animals surrerendered by owners. The shelter staff provides for medical care, annual pet licensure, foster home licensure, and animal adoptions.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 89
- Transparency & Controls: 60
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 36
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 15th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -32%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.56; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 15.5% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
- Consistency: 25 of 27 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2015 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.