Frosted Faces Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
471274069
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Ramona, CA, USA
Phone
7155746320
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,918,264
Expenses
$2,363,221
Assets
$4,347,542
Liabilities
$973,085

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KRISTA VAN TASSEL (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • NEIL RUSSELL (VETERINARIAN): $168,656 total reported compensation
  • LAUREN D OVIEDO MONTS (VETERINARIAN): $158,735 total reported compensation
  • KELLY SMISEK (Director): $70,030 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Rescue abandoned senior animals from shelters, providing them with necessary medical treatment and families for the rest of their lives.

What it reported doing in 2025

Rescue - we provide free medical at fff veterinary clinic for adopters of the frosted faces throughout their lifetime. This incentive helps us to not only place pets with loving familiies without the financial burden, but allows us to move pets through our program in order to rescue more and aid our local shelters during this time of the overpopulation crisis.seniors for seniors program - aims to place frosted faces with people with 65+ years old and with the ability to care for an animal independently in their home and who would like the companionship of a senior animal. Our goal is to reduce or eliminate the common obstacles that prevent senior people from owning pets with the support of a volunteer. We match frosted faces and seniors based on a variety of factors, including the level of care that a frosted face may require and the amount of care that the adopter can provide.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.2%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 86.3%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $30.38 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 19%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.84; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.4%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26.2% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 19.8% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.4% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.2% of revenue deployed · 86.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $169K · 9 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Board meeting minutes documented not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.