Society for the Prevention of Cruelty To Animals

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
561875807
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Greensboro, NC, USA
Phone
3363753222
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Reported finances

Revenue
$551,936
Expenses
$409,769
Assets
$1,876,046
Liabilities
$353,602

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR AIMEE LISCHKE (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CASEY CROSSAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • CINDY DILDAY (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • BRENDA M OVERMAN (FOUNDER)
  • DR AIMEE LISCHKE (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CASEY CROSSAN (EXECUTIVE 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. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

At SPCA of the Triad, we save homeless animals and support the people who love them. As a private, limted-admission shelter, we provide rescue and adoption, and free and low-cost programs and services so people and their pets thrive together.

What it reported doing in 2025

Through our 3 pillars of rescue and caring, programs and services, and community outreach, we support our community by caring for homeless animals until they are adopted, providing low-cost vaccine clinics, pet-food pantry, and providing free and low-cost seminars and trainings.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 66% 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.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.9%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 91.9%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.28 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 10th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 25.8%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.58; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; 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: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 74.9% of revenue deployed · 91.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $377K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.