Thoroughbred Aftercare Alliance Foundati Dba Thoroughbred Aftercare Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454783644
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lexington, KY, USA
Phone
8592242781
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,716,093
Expenses
$5,254,316
Assets
$10,097,260
Liabilities
$82,960

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WALT ROBERTSON (PRESIDENT)
  • MADELINE AUERBACH (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • WALT ROBERTSON (PRESIDENT)
  • MADELINE AUERBACH (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • PRICE BELL (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Thoroughbred aftercare alliance (taa) is an organization designed to serve as both the accrediting body for aftercare organizations that care for thoroughbred horses following the conclusion of their careers as well as a fundraising body to support these approved organizations.

What it reported doing in 2024

In fy 2025, taa granted accreditation to 87 organizations following a thorough and rigorous process whereby each organization agreed to maintain a set code of standards reviewed and approved by the american humane association and the american association of equine practitioners. Each organization was subject to an in depth application and received onsite visits to each organization caring for their horses. In fy 2025 87 of these approved organizations received grants totaling $4,135,694, and these grants may be used only for activities, materials, supplies, and services directly related to the care of the organization's horses.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 89% 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. Some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.4%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 88.4%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Pass
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • 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 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 21.8%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.92; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.4% of revenue deployed · 88.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 24 of 24 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 24 people listed
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 79 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 79 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.