Romanian League in Defense of Animals
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 320176929
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2021–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020
- Location
- Crofton, MD, USA
- Phone
- 4103535505
- Rating
- 62
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Animal Protection and Welfare
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $7,347,691
- Expenses
- $7,172,376
- Assets
- $776,864
- Liabilities
- $120,446
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Elena Daniela Costin (CEO President)
Highest reported compensation
- Shannon McCabe (Secretary): $6,500 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 assist support and promote animal protection in Romania and across the Globe where animals suffer because of natural or human made disasters . We rescue animals that are abused abandoned or injured. Our goal is to find permanent loving homes for as many of our rescued animals as possible.
What it reported doing in 2024
The organization is an international animal welfare organization operating in Romania and Ukraine to help primarily the homeless dog and cat population. This is accomplished by providing animal welfare which includes but is not limited to medical aid shelter and rehabilitation. The organization also provides sterilizations for the dogs rescued in hopes of reducing the stray dog population.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 72% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 35
- Transparency & Controls: 72
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 37
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 38.1%; rating input score 38
- Program expense ratio: 39%; rating input score 39
- Fundraising efficiency: $1.72 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Claims monitoring procedures: Limited
- Requires narrative reports: Limited
- Conducts field audits: Limited
- May suspend future funding: Limited
- Requires financial reports: Limited
- Conducts site visits: Limited
- Requires grant agreements: Limited
- May require repayment: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- 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: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 2.4%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.11; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0.1%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 24.7% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 41.2% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 34.1% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 38.1% of revenue deployed · 39% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $6K · 5 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $1.1M reported
- Consistency: 45 of 46 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 38/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 39/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 4/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.