Rappcats

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
260970194
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Washington, VA, USA
Phone
7036153720
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$337,082
Expenses
$162,590
Assets
$576,863
Liabilities
$2,246

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Holly Glenn (Director and President)

People named in this filing

  • Holly Glenn (Director and President)
  • John Robert Kramer II (Director and Treasurer)
  • Kyle Bass (Director)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

RappCats Adoption Center, a cage-less, no kill facility is the only Virginia approved cat shelter in Rappahannock County. We work closely with the community to reduce cat overpopulation through our spay and neuter program, which provides residents with low and no cost spay and neutering services. Also, when able, we provide family assistance to residents unable to pay veterinary bills and who need help on a large range of cat health issues..

What it reported doing in 2025

1. Rappahannock County is a small county, with fewer than 8,000 inhabitants. The county government does not fund a cat shelter. The RappCats Adoption Center, a private no-kill and cage-free shelter, in Flint Hill, Virginia, acts as a de facto shelter and is the only Virginia approved cat shelter in the county. Adoptions are our original Program Service. In 2025, the Adoption Center and RappCats foster homes served 155 Rappahannock County cats in our custody. During 2025, 65 RappCats were adopted. RappCats has only a full-time shelter manager and a part-time assistant shelter manager. Volunteers provide help with increasing adoptions, socializing homeless cats and kittens, expanding our social media presence, and engaging in community outreach such as through regular open houses and taking part in community events. We advertise cats available from RappCats primarily through social media and the local newspaper. We pay for all necessary medical treatment and vaccinations for our cats. Many costs, including cat food and boarding, utilities, and administration such as insurance and information technology, are necessary costs of a successful adoption center.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 92% 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 total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 42%; rating input score 42
  • Program expense ratio: 84.6%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $48.39 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 74; 74th 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: 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: 51.8%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.55; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.7% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 19.8% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 31% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 42% of revenue deployed · 84.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $137K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 42/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.