Lama Animal Rescue & Support Service

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
851161706
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Springhill, LA, USA
Phone
3182726093
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,571,286
Expenses
$637,712
Assets
$969,560
Liabilities
$25,049

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHELLE B LEWIS (PRESIDENT)
  • ASHLEY MCVEY (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MICHELLE B LEWIS (PRESIDENT)
  • STACI S COLBY (BOARD MEMBER)
  • MARY ANN KAYLOR (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

A non-profit, volunteer group advocating for the many homeless, abused & neglected animals of northwest Louisiana and the surrounding areas.

What it reported doing in 2024

Lama focuses on saving stray, abused and needy animals in northwest Louisiana and the surrounding areas. Our mission is to educate the community on the importance of spay/neuter and regular medical care. Lama relies on a network of qualified foster homes to house the animals while their fosters receive medical care, food and tlc. Once the animal is healthy, they are scheduled for transport to pre-approved rescues mostly in the new england area where they quickly find their forever homes. During 2024, approximately 1,078 animals were helped by lama.

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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 37.7%; rating input score 38
  • Program expense ratio: 93%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 59.4%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.52; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 119.3% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 85% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 111.6% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 37.7% of revenue deployed · 93% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $593K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 38/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.