Paisley Paws Charitable Veterinary Foundation

Legal name: Paisley Paws Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
834011560
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Official website data refreshed
Jul 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Kearney, MO, USA
Phone
4178949932
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,107,551
Expenses
$263,663
Assets
$943,106
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Dr John Talmadge (President)
  • Terry Roman (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Andrea McKown (Executive Dir.): $82,285 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Paisley Paws Charitable Veterinary Foundation's mission is to enhance the well-being of pets and veterinary professionals in need of life-saving and life-enhancing hardship support.

What it reported doing in 2024

Paisley Paws Life-Saving, Life-Enhancing purpose is to provide hardship support directly to PAWrtner clinics during times of medical crises for pet owners who are facing a hardship and unable to afford life-saving, life-enhancing veterinary care. Together we are Helping Vets, Help Pets, reducing hardship euthanasia. A pet candidate would be one with a positive prognosis of returning to a good quality of life, enhancing the human-pet bond. In 2024, 213 pets and pet families were served through our Paisley Paws Life-Saving, Life-Enhancing Pillar program and received the necessary care needed.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 79% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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.

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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 36
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 16.7%; rating input score 17
  • Program expense ratio: 70%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.68 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 25; 25th 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: 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: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 76.2%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.58; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 31.2%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 106.1% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 108.1% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 16.7% of revenue deployed · 70% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $185K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $82K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 17/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 25/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.