Oregon Pet Project
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 923827562
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2024–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023
- Location
- Newberg, OR, USA
- Phone
- 9713876211
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Animal Protection and Welfare
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $360,907
- Expenses
- $355,160
- Assets
- $41,252
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Daria Veenstra (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Kassie Wild (Shelter Manager): $31,833 total reported compensation
- Daria Veenstra (Executive Director): $17,692 total reported compensation
- Isabella Collins (Key Employee): $15,961 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Oregon Pet Projects mission is to provide a safe space for at-risk animals in our community provide them with rehabilitation and place them up for adoption. All while engaging with the hands and hearts of those in our community.
What it reported doing in 2025
Animal Rescue Rehabilitation & Community Adoption Program: Oregon Pet Project is dedicated to rescuing rehabilitating and rehoming at-risk animals in Yamhill County and surrounding communities. During the year the organization provided lifesaving veterinary care spay and neuter services vaccinations food shelter and daily care to hundreds of animals including neonatal kittens puppies and vulnerable companion animals. Program activities included emergency medical treatment preventative veterinary services foster care coordination adoption placement services and community engagement initiatives designed to promote responsible pet ownership. The organization also operated on-site facilities to house cats coordinate adoptions and provide supportive services that increase adoption success and reduce shelter overpopulation.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 76% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- 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
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: 84
- Transparency & Controls: 84
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 32
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 87.9%; rating input score 88
- Program expense ratio: 89.3%; rating input score 89
- Fundraising efficiency: $16.46 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 1.6%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.12; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 19.4%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 34.8% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 35.6% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 18.2% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 87.9% of revenue deployed · 89.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $317K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $32K · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 39 of 41 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 50/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Travel column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.