Sequatchie Valley Low Cost Spay & Neuter

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
821822505
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Dunlap, TN, USA
Phone
4239497799
Rating
46
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Veterinary Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$323,172
Expenses
$318,408
Assets
$4,764
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • James Richards (veterinarian): $75,408 total reported compensation
  • Tanya Wood (license Vet Tech): $25,798 total reported compensation
  • Debra Hoffman (Founder Director): $19,600 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 offer a low-cost alternative to spay & Neuter

What it reported doing in 2024

MARC animal rescue uses our facility to have their animals spay & Neuter to find forever homes for their rescue.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 98% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.5%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.01; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 37.9%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 18.6% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 57.2% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $75K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 34 of 41 current checks pass · 7 findings to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX InformationTechnology column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Insurance column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Occupancy column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherSalariesAndWages column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PayrollTaxes column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.