MAD Dog Rescue Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 821390565
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2017–2017
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2017
- Location
- Richmond, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9252858869
- Rating
- 52
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Animal Protection and Welfare
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $52,996
- Expenses
- $22,977
- Assets
- $30,019
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
People named in this filing
- Ryan Curtis Darfler (Director)
- Kendall Darfler (Chief Financial Officer)
- Carol Hopewell (Director of Foster and Adoption)
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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
MAD Dog Rescue, a Northern California 501(c)(3), exists to Make A Difference in the lives of domestic animals. We accomplish this through: direct disaster relief, emergency logistics, and relocation/homing efforts. Because we do not currently have a dedicated adoption center our homing efforts incorporate the use of a group of dedicated volunteer foster homes in conjunction with community outreach and mobile adoption events. We are currently located in Richmond, CA and provide service to large portions of Central and Northern California.
What it reported doing in 2017
Spay/Neuter: Began fundraising and raised a significant portion of the required funds needed to purchase a mobile spay/neuter van.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 94% 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.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 31
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 67
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 20.8%; rating input score 21
- Program expense ratio: 47.9%; rating input score 48
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 56.6%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.31; rating input score 55; 55th 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: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 20.8% of revenue deployed · 47.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $11K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 21/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 48/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
- Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.