The Ginger Cat Project Incorporated
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 991123882
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Holbrook, MA, USA
- Phone
- 6176869135
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $15,070
- Expenses
- $8,824
- Assets
- $6,746
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Brian Chisholm (President)
- Kristin Chisholm (Executive Director)
People named in this filing
- Brian Chisholm (President)
- Kristin Chisholm (Executive Director)
- Amy O'Regan (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Promoting the adoption of animals.
What it reported doing in 2025
Our Santa Paws event included visits to 5 animal shelters that hosted holiday open houses, where each shelter received a $500 donation along with much-needed items from their wish lists. The 5 shelters were the Animal Rescue League of Boston, Quincy Animal Shelter, Furget Me Not, Nine Lives of Norton, and the Animal Protection Center of Southeastern Massachusetts.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 70% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 74
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 67
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 59.1%; rating input score 59
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 41.4%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.76; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 200% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 200% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 200% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 59.1% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $9K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.