Los Angeles Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
951738153
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
3237305300
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$13,433,897
Expenses
$9,960,476
Assets
$71,108,517
Liabilities
$7,152,049

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MADELINE BERNSTEIN (PRESIDENT)
  • ELIZABETH PELAYO (SR. VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MIRIAM DAVENPORT (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MADELINE BERNSTEIN (PRESIDENT): $343,666 total reported compensation
  • BRENDA JAMES (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $193,049 total reported compensation
  • ELIZABETH PELAYO (SR. VICE PRESIDENT): $183,384 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Spcala is dedicated to the prevention of cruelty to animals through education, law enforcement, intervention and advocacy.

What it reported doing in 2024

Violence prevention humane education programs: spcala aims to support the development of healthy relationships and compassionate communities as one way to prevent animal cruelty and interpersonal violence. The program does this by:*engaging youth and children in empathy-based animal welfare education and social-emotional learning.*encouraging youth advocacy for animals, others, and themselves.*offering violence intervention and support services for adults and families.in fiscal year 2025, spcala extended concepts of empathy and compassion to youth, adults, and children through a host of offerings.teaching love & compassion (tlc) and the court diversion program for youth: tlc is a program for underserved youth that offers a small-group format which combines social-emotional learning with animal welfare lessons and hands-on positive reinforcement training with shelter dogs. Spcala developed tlc over twenty-five years ago and has such significant success with it we now also offer the spcala court diversion program for youth.the diversion program is an animal-assisted intervention program modeled after tlc but specifically made for justice system-involved youth referred by the los angeles county district attorneys' office and other juvenile justice professionals. Spcala offered tlc four times during the year, at middle schools in whittier and long beach, California, reaching 47 students. The diversion program was offered once during the fiscal year, reaching three students.animal safety net (asn): domestic violence survivors will often not leave a situation of abuse if it means they must leave their pets behind. Abusers often threaten, harm, or kill pets to maintain control. Since 1998, the spcala animal safety net (asn) pet housing program has worked to break the cycle of violence by providing safe, temporary housing for the pets of domestic violence survivors. The program has since expanded to others in crisis including those experiencing temporary homelessness, or those entering treatment facilities. In fiscal year 2025, spcala housed 80 asn pets helping 36 families, which included 44 children. The average length of stay for asn pets was 59 days. Out of the 36 clients helped, 18 were domestic violence survivors, 10 were unhoused, and seven were in treatment or recovery, and one was a veteran.additional programming: spcala friends for life summer camp returned, hosting 150 youth over the course of seven, one-week sessions. Additionally, spcala continues to offer pet care patch workshops, online presentations, and other resources for youth and educators.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 65% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.8%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 82%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.17 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 66th 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: 25.9%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.14; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.5%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.8% of revenue deployed · 82% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $8.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $344K · 13 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $785K reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.