One Health Organization
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 300516947
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Woodmere, OH, USA
- Phone
- 2169203051
- Rating
- 68
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Animal Protection and Welfare
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $581,231
- Expenses
- $567,849
- Assets
- $435,438
- Liabilities
- $7,875
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ANNA M VAN HEECKEREN (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- R PATRICK CANNON (BOARD CHAIR)
- JOHN FURLONG (TRUSTEE)
- LESLIE GENTILE (TRUSTEE)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
One health organization's mission is to help dog and cat pet parents benefit from positive mental and physical effects of pet ownership by providing increased access to veterinary care through compassionate, community-based social services so the entire family stays healthy, happy and together.
What it reported doing in 2024
The organization's primary program is the veterinary care voucher card program, which provides financial assistance to income-qualified households living at or below 200% of the federal poverty level to help offset the cost of veterinary care for dogs and cats. During the fiscal year ended june 30, 2025, the organization provided voucher cards to 308 households, enabling access to essential veterinary services, including preventive care, diagnostic testing, medications, treatment of acute and chronic conditions, spay/neuter procedures, prescription diets, and end-of-life care. Voucher cards were utilized at 33 veterinary clinics across northeast Ohio. During the fiscal year, the organization expanded its program delivery model through partnerships with nonprofit organizations, including benjamin rose institute on aging and neighborhood pets, to distribute voucher cards to targeted populations such as seniors and low-income individuals. These partnerships increased access to veterinary care while improving program reach and operational efficiency. Program service expenses for the fiscal year were approximately 178,000, compared to approximately 220,000 in the prior fiscal year. This decrease primarily reflects the timing of voucher utilization and reimbursement submissions by veterinary providers, which occur after services are rendered and require administrative review and reconciliation. Program demand is high with over 50 new people requesting assistance each month. In addition to direct financial assistance, the organization provided educational resources related to veterinary care, supportive services, and pet wellness that were accessed extensively by pet owners throughout the region. During the fiscal year, the organization also implemented operational improvements to streamline voucher application, approval, reimbursement, and financial tracking processes through the use of digital tools and enhanced workflows. These efforts are intended to improve efficiency, reduce administrative burden, strengthen financial oversight, and support the organization's continued growth and long-term sustainability.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 82% 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
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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 30
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 47
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 34.2%; rating input score 34
- Program expense ratio: 31.4%; rating input score 31
- Fundraising efficiency: $3.3 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 2.3%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.77; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 34.2% of revenue deployed · 31.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $178K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 34/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 31/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 10/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.