Tigerlily Cat Rescue

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
562675192
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Sterling Heights, MI, USA
Phone
8105135067
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Reported finances

Revenue
$84,818
Expenses
$72,952
Assets
$76,465
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • KIMBERLY BIDLINGMAIER (PRESIDENTTREASURER)
  • JEANNE ERFURT (VICE PRESIDENTADOPTON COORDINATOR)
  • CRISTEN ALIMARIO (BOARD MEMBER TNR BARN PROGRAM DIREC)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Tigerlily Cat Rescue takes in cats and kittens from Macomb and Oakland Counties in Michigan to receive recommended veterinary care. Of age cats and kittens will be spayed or neutered prior to being adopted and then will be placed into private foster homes until they are adopted.

What it reported doing in 2025

Veterinary expenses - basic cost of spaying and neutering the cats and kittens that are rescued and brought in to be adopted to families in the macomb and oakland county areas in Michigan. Donation amounts received for veterinary expenses included: adoption intake $13,077 total foster donations $54,801 foster expenses - expenses relating to finding a proper home for the cats and kittens that are rescued and then adopted to families in the macomb and oakland county areas in Michigan. Donation amounts received for foster expenses included: adoption intake $9,737

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.4%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 90%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.05; rating input score 28; 28th 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 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.4% of revenue deployed · 90% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $66K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.