Life 4 Paws

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954827495
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023, Form 990-EZ 2016, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Napoleonville, LA, USA
Phone
5042294229
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,656,446
Expenses
$8,481,925
Assets
$792,631
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Tia Maria Torres (President Treasurer)
  • Mariah Harmony Kaye (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Tia Maria Torres (President Treasurer)
  • Mariah Harmony Kaye (Vice President)
  • Mariah Kaye Chock (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 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Life 4 Paws works ceaselessly to give Pit Bulls and other types of dogs and cats another chance in life. Each and EVERY dog is taken in and received any and all medical treatment necessary. We work patiently to re-acclimatize fearful dogs to the loving care of a human so that they may eventually be adopted.

What it reported doing in 2023

Our main program expenses are as such: vet medical to include major surgeries heartworm treatment and spay neuter of all dogs. Also TNR for feral cat colonies in our parish as well as spay neuter for cats in our care and additional the rescue transport expenses of all of our cats to our rescue partner in New Hampshire. We also purchased a large property to relocate our New Orleans dogs after losing our rental location.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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 and most voting board members are independent. 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: 22
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 23.1%; rating input score 23
  • Program expense ratio: 23.6%; rating input score 24
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.33 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 80%; rating input score 80; 0th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 2%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.09; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 117.2% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 26.8% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 23.1% of revenue deployed · 23.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 41 current checks pass · 11 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2021 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 23/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 24/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Advertising column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX AllOtherExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesLegal column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX InformationTechnology column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Insurance column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Occupancy column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherEmployeeBenefits column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherSalariesAndWages column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Travel column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.