The AKC Humane Fund Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 260542468
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2010, Form 990-N 2007
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Phone
- 2126968200
- Rating
- 67
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Animal-Related N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $532,353
- Expenses
- $281,979
- Assets
- $1,378,853
- Liabilities
- $162,249
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Doug Ljungren (President)
Highest reported compensation
- Gina M DiNardo (DIRECTOR): $888,514 total reported compensation
- Daphna Straus (Secretary): $732,668 total reported compensation
- Doug Ljungren (President): $517,607 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The akc humane fund's mission is to unite a broad spectrum of animal lovers in promoting the joy and value of responsible pet ownership through education, outreach and grant-making.
What it reported doing in 2024
Awards and scholarships: the akc humane fund gives certain awards and scholarships. Awards for canine excellence (ace) recognizes a dog that has performed some exemplary act, whether large or seemingly small, that has significantly benefited a community or individual. The george ward scholarship fund program was established to recognize and reward registered handler apprentice program (rhp) apprentices who are learning dog handling. The akc humane fund also awards various types of junior scholarships as well as vet outreach scholarships.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 97% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 77
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 32
- Sustainability: 72
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 68.7%; rating input score 69
- Program expense ratio: 94.7%; rating input score 95
- Fundraising efficiency: $26.99 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 92.1%; rating input score 92; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 47%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.89; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 73.2%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 68.7% of revenue deployed · 94.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $267K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $889K · 5 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 9 filed related-organization links
- 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: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.