Front Range Equine Rescue

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841418525
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Great Falls, VA, USA
Phone
3522097510
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,473,303
Expenses
$1,287,364
Assets
$13,062,262
Liabilities
$66,400

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HILARY WOOD (PRESIDENT)
  • MARION NAGLE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • HILARY WOOD (PRESIDENT): $43,000 total reported compensation
  • MARION NAGLE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $3,974 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To prevent the abuse and neglect of horses through rescue and education.

What it reported doing in 2025

Front range equine rescue's educational and rescue programs combine to prevent the abuse/neglect of horses. Program efforts include direct rescue of horses in need, rehabilitation, evaluation/, sanctuary and retirement, fire/disaster evacuation, save the wild horses campaign, sponsor-a-horse, ban horse slaughter campaign and events designed to educate horse enthusiasts on a wide variety of horse care topics and responsible horse ownership including how to safely rehome a horse. Website, email, news blog and social media (facebook) provide alerts and updates on horses, activities and abuse issues. Hundreds of horses are assisted through rescue efforts with thousands of others impacted by education, advocacy and legal efforts where appropriate.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 86
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47.5%; rating input score 47
  • Program expense ratio: 87.6%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $28.19 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 47.9%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.15; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.6%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47.5% of revenue deployed · 87.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $43K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 47/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.