Planned Pethood of Georgia Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 900516757
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2010
- Location
- Duluth, GA, USA
- Phone
- 6785613491
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Animal Protection and Welfare
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,043,043
- Expenses
- $2,850,822
- Assets
- $724,341
- Liabilities
- $343,097
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CYNTHIA BENTLEY (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
Highest reported compensation
- JENNIFER COCHRAN-ODUM (MEDICAL DIRECTOR): $161,329 total reported compensation
- CYNTHIA BENTLEY (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $100,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
See schedule o.
What it reported doing in 2024
Planned pethood of Georgia performs medical services under contract for gwinnett county animal welfare and enforcement as well as several other smaller counties in close proximity to planned pethood. The contracts provide for a veterinary team to administer medical services for animals in the county's care. Planned pethood's veterinary team provides in-house evaluations and treatments including spay / neuter, treatments for illnesses and injuries, routine wellness care, testing and vaccinations, and heartworm treatments. With these services, suffering is alleviated and the spread of disease is prevented. Healthy animals are vetted and sterilized before adoption, allowing adopters the ability to adopt healthy animals and take them home on the same day.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 67% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 72
- Transparency & Controls: 74
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 34
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 77.3%; rating input score 77
- Program expense ratio: 82.5%; rating input score 83
- Fundraising efficiency: $5.26 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 6.3%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.47; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.2%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 17.6% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 19.5% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 77.3% of revenue deployed · 82.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $161K · 12 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 18/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.