Lehigh County Humane Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
231365372
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Allentown, PA, USA
Phone
6107973439
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,656,763
Expenses
$3,334,278
Assets
$9,925,445
Liabilities
$2,087,176

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HAL WARNER (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • HAL WARNER (CEO): $176,179 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the lehigh county humane society is the prevention of cruelty to animals; the relief of suffering among animals; and the extension of humane education. The organization provides humane care and treatment for all animals which need protection in the area served by society; seeks to return lost animals to their owners; seeks suitable homes for animals without owners; and provides euthenasia when necessary.

What it reported doing in 2024

Cruelty investigation; temporary care and housing of stray and unwanted animals; animal adoption and euthenasia services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.9%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 77.1%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.47 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.8%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.98; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.3%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.7% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.9% of revenue deployed · 77.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $2.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $176K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 19/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.