Nashville Humane Association Aka Nashville Humane Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
620672999
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Nashville, TN, USA
Phone
6154776738
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,318,585
Expenses
$5,089,942
Assets
$6,099,115
Liabilities
$42,109

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

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHELLE COTTON (BOARD PRESIDENT)
  • LAURA BAKER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LAURA BAKER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $174,556 total reported compensation
  • MEGAN ANDERSON (VETERINARIAN): $135,289 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Nashville humane is committed to promoting humane education, controlling pet overpopulation and finding responsible homes for the homeless and adoptable pet community in nashville and through Tennessee.

What it reported doing in 2024

Pet adoptions: nha provided shelter, medical care, and vaccines for 3,139 animals in 2024.pet food bank: in 2024 nashville humane association distributed 17 tons of food to animals in need. The need for resources has increased with our focus on keeping animals in homes with their owners. We are spending more resources in the community than ever before in an effort to keep pets out of the shelter and with their human owners.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 78% 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

STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.5%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 78.5%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.58 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: 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: -17.9%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.2; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.1%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.5% of revenue deployed · 78.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $175K · 25 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.