The Cleo Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
010361574
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015, Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
West Kennebunk, ME, USA
Phone
2079853244
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,305,749
Expenses
$309,722
Assets
$1,605,517
Liabilities
$16,971

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CATHERINE CONNORS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN CAVARETTA (PRESIDENT)
  • ABIGAIL SMITH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ABIGAIL SMITH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $117,945 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization's mission is to prevent cruelty to unwanted animals by preventing the overbreeding of cats and dogs which might otherwise die of starvation, disease or injury or might suffer a life of abuse and neglect and to aid pet owners who desire to spay or neuter their pets but cannnot otherwise afford the cost.

What it reported doing in 2015

The cleo fund was founded in 1971 and since its inception has provided resources to facilitate more than 40,000 spays and neuters for pets belonging to income qualified Maine residents. The cleo fund coordinates with more than 30 veterinary clinics across Maine and in bordering canada to provide access to spay/neuter surgery for dogs, cats and rabbits, in addition to providing education, outreach and services for Maine's feral cat population and their caretakers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% 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

SUPPORTED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 23%; rating input score 23
  • Program expense ratio: 91.1%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $294.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 76.3%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.18; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 135.2% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 47.1% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 42.5% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 23% of revenue deployed · 91.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $282K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $118K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 23/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.