Partners for Animal Welfare Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
352107819
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2008
Location
Greenfield, IN, USA
Phone
3173189483
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$177,532
Expenses
$154,434
Assets
$149,709
Liabilities
$1,000

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JASON TAYLOR (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JASON TAYLOR (PRESIDENT)
  • PAUL SAHM (TREASURER)
  • LISA BROWN (SECRETARY)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To promote animal welfare in hancock county through humane education and pet population control by: developing and providing humane education programs that teach kindness to and respect for all living things. Helping animals housed in animal care shelters by promoting shelter adoptions and by providing improvements to shelter facilities, trainging for shelter staff and volunteers. Promoting shelter and community based pet sterilization programs.

What it reported doing in 2024

Reduced pet overpopulation by providing low and no-cost spay and neuter surgeries. In 2024, approximately 650 cats, dogs and small animals were spayed/neutered under our program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.6%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 65%; rating input score 65

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.97; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.6% of revenue deployed · 65% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $100K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.