North Texas Australian Shepherd Rescue

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
854230034
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Fort Worth, TX, USA
Phone
2144332598
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$309,010
Expenses
$310,293
Assets
$5,712
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Samantha Anderson (President)
  • Shawn Rogers (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Samantha Anderson (President): $25,584 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

NTASR helps rescue and rehabilitate Australian Shepherds, Border Collies, and mixes of the two.Thus far, several other breeds have made their way through the rescue including a doodle, a dachshund, a frenchie, and a shar pei. NTASR takes behavioral and medical dogs and gets them the appropriate rehab to be able to find them the perfect forever home. Aussies are such special breeds and deserve very particular and experienced homes.

What it reported doing in 2025

Specialist Veterinary care is required for many of our dogs. Several of our dogs required up to $5000 in surgeries. We have dogs that have required Veterinary eye surgeons, renal specialists, and orthopedic surgeons. We have up to 10 dogs a month that require extra levels of care to be rehabilitated and ready for adoption. Thanks to your unwavering support, in 2025 we rescued over 700 dogs, found loving homes for 500, and partnered with rescues to give 200 more a second chance.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 61% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 35
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.8%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 84.4%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $83.54 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th 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: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.4%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.02; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.2%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 52.8% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 53.6% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.8% of revenue deployed · 84.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $262K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $26K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.