The Cleveland Animal Protective League

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
340714644
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Cleveland, OH, USA
Phone
2167714616
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,411,587
Expenses
$10,682,476
Assets
$45,654,297
Liabilities
$554,480

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

27 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SHARI GIBBS ANDRUS (VICE PRESIDENT OF FINANCE)
  • SHARON A HARVEY (PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • JUDITH HUNTER (VICE PRESIDENT OF PHILANTH)
  • AYSE DUNLAP (VICE PRESIDENT OF OPERATIONS)

Highest reported compensation

  • SHARON A HARVEY (PRESIDENT & CEO): $257,199 total reported compensation
  • ALLISON LASH DVM (MEDICAL DIRECTOR): $184,481 total reported compensation
  • AYSE DUNLAP (VICE PRESIDENT OF OPERATIONS): $138,107 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 cleveland animal protective league's (apl) mission is to foster compassion and end animal suffering. The apl provides shelter, care, and medical treatment to animals that have lost their homes and/or suffered cruelty or neglect. It also provides humane law enforcement in cuyahoga county, spay/neuter services for shelter animals and community pets, operates a low-cost veterinary clinic for pet owners in cleveland facing financial challenges, and offers resources to income-qualified pet owners in cleveland to help them access the care they need and want for their pets keeping families together. In 2024, the apl helped more than 21,000 animals through an array of progressive programs. The apl relies on the support of private donors and fees for service to make all this work possible. The apl does not receive government funding for operations and is not governed by, nor does it receive regular operating support from, any national animal welfare organization.

What it reported doing in 2024

Humane investigations*: the apl is the lead agency in cuyahoga county for investigating animal cruelty, neglect, and abandonment. Under Ohio law, the cleveland apl's board of directors is authorized to appoint humane society agents to enforce local and state animal protection laws; these appointments must be approved by the cuyahoga county probate court. The apl does not receive public funding for this program; it is funded solely by donations. In 2024, the humane investigations team opened 2,106 new investigations of suspected animal abuse and either impounded or rescued 1,070 animals. The apl's humane society agents also seek justice for animal victims by working with prosecutors to secure convictions for those charged with animal cruelty **************** (see schedule o for continuation) ******************* ...or neglect. Under Ohio law, humane agents are mandated reporters for child and elder abuse and neglect. The expenses shared in this section reflect the core cost of operating the humane investigations program and do not include the cost of caring for cruelty victims, which can range from basic daily care to extensive, sometimes complex, veterinary care to heal both their bodies and spirits and save their lives.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 74% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.4%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 81.7%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.25 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -2.6%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.27; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.3%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93.4% of revenue deployed · 81.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $8.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $257K · 27 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $468K reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.