The Association for Animal Welfare Advancement

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411618666
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Surprise, AZ, USA
Phone
8886003648
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,334,665
Expenses
$2,468,156
Assets
$3,034,035
Liabilities
$29,167

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Katherine Shenar (Executive Vice President)
  • Patricia Cunningham (Vice President of Programs)

Highest reported compensation

  • James Tedford CAWA (Ex Officio): $242,204 total reported compensation
  • Katherine Shenar (Executive Vice President): $170,100 total reported compensation
  • Patricia Cunningham (Vice President of Programs): $126,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Association conducts seminars and certification programs to carry out its exempt purposes.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Association is a community of professionals committed to excellence in the management and operation of local animal welfare and control organizations. Through the active involvement and contributions of its members, the Association provides the practical knowledge, resources and solutions members need to grow as professionals, achieve the goals of their organizations, and collectively, advance the animal welfare profession.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 93% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.1%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 91.9%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -5.7%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.23; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.1% of revenue deployed · 91.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $242K · 17 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $245K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.