Laurels House
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 842487783
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2021–2021
- Forms available
- Form 990 2021
- Location
- Houston, TX, USA
- Phone
- 8016475643
- Rating
- 67
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Veterinary Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $437,666
- Expenses
- $437,666
- Assets
- $3,050
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Amy Crum (President)
Highest reported compensation
- Cheryl Hoggard (Veterinarian): $96,000 total reported compensation
- Rudy E (Operations Manager): $55,000 total reported compensation
- Amy Crum (President): $10,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Laurel's House strengthens the human animal bond improves public health decreases the number of companion animal euthanasia due to overpopulation and diminishes human impact on native wildlife species by providing unprecedented access to high quality veterinary care humane education and rehabilitation for underserved communities families and species.
What it reported doing in 2021
Laurel's House provided free veterinary care for 104 companion animals in situations where the only alternatives were surrender or euthanasia of the pet. This access to veterinary care safety net program is especially important in the Houston Texas community where all local shelters are overburdened. Cases ranged from severe burn injuries sustained in a house fire during the February 2021 freeze fracture repair surgeries treatment of life-threatening illnesses such as parvovirus and free boarding and veterinary care for pets of owners fleeing domestic violence situations.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 80% 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.
- 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 74
- Transparency & Controls: 81
- Accountability: 61
- Sustainability: 26
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 83%; rating input score 83
- Program expense ratio: 83%; rating input score 83
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.01; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 36.8%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 83% of revenue deployed · 83% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 1 of 3 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $438K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $96K · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 38 of 40 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PayrollTaxes column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.