Scouts Animal Rehab Therapy Fund Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
371615683
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Burlingame, CA, USA
Phone
6503301280
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scouting

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,517
Expenses
$31,112
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Andrea Capozzoli (Executive Dir.)
  • Nancy Raber (Director)
  • Karen Deshayes (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To underwrite the expensive cost of veterinary rehabilitaion therapy for any special needs or service animals who have been abused, disabled, injured, ill or are recovering from surgery.

What it reported doing in 2015

Baer's fund for retrievers: Labs, goldens, chesapeake bays, flat-coated, curly-coated, nova scotia duck tolling-retrievers are among the most popular dogs in america. Their gentle personalities make them the ideal breeds for helping as assistance dogs, working as K9 unit dogs, or just stealing our hearts as members of the family. Please help Baer's fund underwrite the cost of rehab therapy for retrievers of all shapes and sizes, whether they come from low-income families, work as K9 unit or assistance dogs, or are in the legal care of animal shelters or rescue groups.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 2
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.8%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 18.3%; rating input score 18

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -313.9%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 63.2%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -11% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -39.1% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.8% of revenue deployed · 18.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 6 filed program accomplishments · $6K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2011 to 2015
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.