Muttnation Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270713907
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Nashville, TN, USA
Phone
6153299902
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,750,860
Expenses
$1,869,157
Assets
$3,138,204
Liabilities
$18,004

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NINA MILLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • MIRANDA LAMBERT (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • NINA MILLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $105,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See schedule o

What it reported doing in 2024

General support - due to the pandemic, many of the in-person events muttnation typically sponsor, and support were not able to take place. Some of the programs muttnation supported previously included love harder, share the love, pawsitively famous, muttnation fund at waggle, and us war dogs. * love harder - received a grant from life of riley at springpoint to initiate the love harder program, which advances the adoption of the hardest-to-get adopted dogs (seniors, dogs with disabilities, pit mixes, and large dogs). The initial campaign included television, radio and billboard ads as well as significant social postings. * share the love - individuals pledged their time to volunteer at their local shelter for a day. Their selected shelter was then entered into a random drawing for one of the twenty $1,000 grants. This generated more than 5,000 confirmed volunteers and 20 vetted shelters received grants. * pawsitively famous - muttnation provides annual support to this organization that helps transport abused animals and animals that are at risk of being euthanized. * muttnation fund at waggle - this fund assists with medical bills for people's pets with unexpected needs. * us war dogs - muttnation provided support for this organization that helps with expenses for military and service dogs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 63% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 94% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 48.9%; rating input score 49
  • Program expense ratio: 68.9%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.37 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 59.2%; rating input score 59; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 32.1%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.68; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.6%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.1% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.6% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.3% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 48.9% of revenue deployed · 68.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $105K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 45 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 45 filed related-organization links
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 49/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 10/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 59/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.