Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Maui

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
271019570
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2013
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2013, Form 990-N 2011
Location
Wailuku, HI, USA
Phone
8082800738
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Reported finances

Revenue
$148,930
Expenses
$56,932
Assets
$127,727
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Susan Liscombe (President)
  • Peter Tierney (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Susan Liscombe (President)
  • Peter Tierney (Vice President)
  • Geogia Norton (Treasurer)

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 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

SPCA Maui is an animal advocacy organization whose mission is to create a 'no more homeless pets' Maui and stop the killing of companion animals as a means of population control.

What it reported doing in 2013

SPCA Maui pet food distribution program is a program whereby we receive damaged/unwanted pet food from local merchants to be repackaged and distributed in conjunction with meal and food distributions to the needy and homeless. This program is funded and worked by volunteers.

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 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the available information about grant readiness automatic revocation leaves an important question unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 89
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 33%; rating input score 33
  • Program expense ratio: 86.2%; rating input score 86

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 61.8%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.24; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 67.7% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 112.6% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 33% of revenue deployed · 86.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $49K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2012 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 33/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.