Horse Welfare Collective
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 862773638
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2021–2023
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Charlotte, NC, USA
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Animal Protection and Welfare
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $31,453
- Expenses
- $31,170
- Assets
- $474
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Caroline Howe (Executive Director)
People named in this filing
- Caroline Howe (Executive Director)
- Olivia Alcorta (Board Member)
- Tom McGinn (Board Member)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Researches and reports on the US horse slaughter industry and its impact on horse welfare and public health.
What it reported doing in 2023
Rehomed trained and supported horses in slaughter marketing channels to improve welfare outcomes and their future. Conducted outreach efforts to USDA APHIS and Area Vets In Charge about significant horse welfare and disease traceability concerns within various slaughter marketing channels. Reaching and testing rehoming solutions for at-risk horses. Raising awareness about and enrolling equestrians about horse welfare outcomes in the US.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 99% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 99
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 31
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 99.1%; rating input score 99
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0.9%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.02; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -125.3% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 99.1% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $31K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2021 to 2023
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.