Mapaw Siberian Husky Rescue and Referral Service

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
233068855
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
Boyertown, PA, USA
Phone
6103690055
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$53,842
Expenses
$69,759
Assets
$496,029
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DOUGLAS RHOADS (PRESIDENT)
  • ROBERT LATCH (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • DOUGLAS RHOADS (PRESIDENT)
  • ROBERT LATCH (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KAREN ZANE (TREASURER)

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 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Mapaw siberian husky rescue is dedicated to the caring and placement of siberian husky and husky mix dogs, into loving permanent homes through adoption and referral services.

What it reported doing in 2019

The organization rescues and places siberian husky dogs with new owners. Every year program services include the spaying/neutering and medical care of homeless and abandoned dogs as well as the cost of providing room and board for the dogs in the organization's kennel.

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.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 93
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 82.3%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $105.34 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -29.6%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.11; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -44.9% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 82.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $57K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2014 to 2019
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.