Richmond Animal League Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510240493
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Richmond, VA, USA
Phone
8043790046
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,011,368
Expenses
$4,411,639
Assets
$8,662,551
Liabilities
$218,232

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LORA LOFTIS (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • LARRY EASON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LARRY EASON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $153,653 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide homeless animals with temporary housing, medical treatment, sterilization and quality care until they are adopted into permanent, loving homes.

What it reported doing in 2024

Ral provided temporary, safe, clean housing, food, medical care, exercise and socialization to over 1,500 homeless pets. The majority of pets were transferred to ral from over 30 partnering municipal animal control facilities throughout central Virginia, freeing them up to help more homeless pets. Once sterilized and medically cleared for adoption into new homes, ral provided a thoughtful quality adoption process that emphasized counseling on pet selection, vet checks and follow-up calls to ensure that the pets and owners were adjusting. Ral continues to provide training and assistance as needed to help keep animals in their new homes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 65% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.1%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 79.4%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.26 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.96; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.5%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.1% of revenue deployed · 79.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $154K · 14 people listed · 0 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: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 31/100.