Napiers Log Cabin Horse & Animal Sanctuary Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
470943243
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2012
Forms available
Form 990 2012
Location
Bradenton, FL, USA
Phone
9417508185
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$105,868
Expenses
$96,766
Assets
$609,102
Liabilities
$600,000

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

MISSION: To provide a temporary home to homeless animals until a permanent adoptive home can be found. To provide a permanent home to animals that can not be adopted. Also to help educate the public about adopting and taking care of homeless animals to help the county in becoming a "no-kill" community where no adoptable animal is euthanized just for lack of space and time.

What it reported doing in 2012

The Sanctuary has only one purpose, to house animals until a permanant home can be found

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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 60th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.6%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.29; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.99; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 29.5% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 0 of 6 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $97K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2011 to 2012
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.