Laughing Eyes Kennels

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
261391996
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2016
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2016, Form 990-N 2008
Location
Nogal, NM, USA
Phone
5753544009
Rating
38
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Other Services - Specialty Animals

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,243
Expenses
$1,366
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • TARYN MCCAIN (PRES/SEC/DIR)
  • CHRIS LONG (VICE-PRESIDE)
  • GAIL HOVIOUS (TREASURER/DI)

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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Breed and train service dogs for the disabled. Educate public about training and handling of service dogs.

What it reported doing in 2016

In 2015, laughing eyes kennels decided to focus on winding up operations. The organization placed all remaining dogs deemed suitable for the disabled and began donating assets to related charitable organizations. The organization has liquidated and dissolved in 2016 as planned. During 2016 the organization sold the small amount of remaining property, closed the bank, sold/placed two remaining dogs with suitable pet home families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 67% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

REVIEW - 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: 9
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 10.7%; rating input score 11
  • Program expense ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 5

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9.9%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st 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: -19.4% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -18.4% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -39.9% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 10.7% of revenue deployed · 5.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $75 in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2016
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 11/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.