Sauk County Humane Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391381967
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Baraboo, WI, USA
Phone
6083562520
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,442,072
Expenses
$863,641
Assets
$1,534,482
Liabilities
$299,609

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANA MADALON (PRESIDENT)
  • CAROL BURDICK NELSON (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • DANA MADALON (PRESIDENT)
  • CAROL BURDICK NELSON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KRISTI BUBOIS (SECRETARY)

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

1 we provide care for animals, serve as a central informative clearinghouse for location of lost pet animals, provide adoption services

What it reported doing in 2025

We assisted two individuals with veterinary services through the josh diehm memorial fund for $122 to help owners who have fallen on difficult times keep their pets, three programs have been in place since january 2012: pet partership, safekeeping, and a pet food pantry. These programs help low-income county residents who are temporarily unable to care for their pets or who have emergency pet food or housing needs. These programs are designed to help residents keep their pets rather than giving them away or surrending them to the shelter. In 2025, we assisted 56 individuals through these programs and 40 pets.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 68% 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 total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 61
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 49.6%; rating input score 50
  • Program expense ratio: 81.6%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 15th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 40.1%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.78; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 49.6% of revenue deployed · 81.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $704K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 50/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 57/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.