Hub City Animal Project Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
823535935
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Spartanburg, SC, USA
Phone
8646802946
Rating
41
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$48,377
Expenses
$66,431
Assets
$36,991
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • VALERIE BARNET (PRESIDENT)
  • LORA HODGE (VICE-PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JUDY SAAD (TREASURER)
  • VALERIE BARNET (PRESIDENT)
  • INGRID NORRIS (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the corporation is to establish a non-profit organization to fund and empower the organizations that work to prevent animals from entering the shelter and rescue system. The corporation informs animal owners about root causes of animal homelessness, as well as the proper and humane treatment of animals, and works to provide solutions for better animal care. The corporation helps pets stay with their owners, when appropriate, and out of shelters, and assists owners in finding free or low-cost spay and neuter options. The corporation provides grants for animal welfare organizations that implement programming to prevent suffering and homelessness in spartanburg county.

What it reported doing in 2025

To provide the community with animal services and education to ensure humane treatment of animals and a decrease in animal homelessness.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -37.3%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 78.2%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -19.5% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -10.7% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.7% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.