Partnership for Animal Welfare Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521979581
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Greenbelt, MD, USA
Phone
3015724729
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$199,954
Expenses
$174,430
Assets
$601,544
Liabilities
$93,936

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARTHA OPPENHEIM (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ROBIN VINOPAL (PRESIDENT & TREASURER)

People named in this filing

  • MARTHA OPPENHEIM (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ROBIN VINOPAL (PRESIDENT & TREASURER)
  • EMILY RATNER (BOARD MEMBER)

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

The partnership for animal welfare is committed to ending the pet overpopulation problem which plagues our area by rescuing, spaying and neutering, and adopting out animals in need into loving homes and educating the general public about responsible pet ownership.

What it reported doing in 2024

General program - rescued and provided veterinary treatment and shelter for homeless dogs and cats. At our showings, we provided the public with a chance to meet the animals and discuss both the animals needs and the needs of the prospective adopter so we could find the best home for our animals. Through our website and newsletters issued in 2024, we provided important pet care information.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 87% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.4%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 75.6%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.97 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 12.8%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.45; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.4% of revenue deployed · 75.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $132K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.