Veterinary Emergency & Critical Care Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911043231
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Antonio, TX, USA
Phone
2106985575
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,593,752
Expenses
$7,204,444
Assets
$14,879,932
Liabilities
$2,080,930

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHRISTOPHER GRAY (CEO)
  • KENICHIRO YAGI (Past President)
  • DR STEVEN EPSTEIN (President)
  • ARMI PIGOTT (PRESIDENT ELECT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRISTOPHER GRAY (CEO): $303,564 total reported compensation
  • SARAH KOKERNOT (DIR OF MEETINGS/EV): $147,439 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 society provides a forum for collaboration of all individuals interested in & involved with veterinary emergency & critical care medicine & surgery. The society promotes the advancement of knowledge & high standards of practice in veterinary emergency medicine & critical patient care.

What it reported doing in 2024

Sponsored educational programs and/or displayed informational exhibits on veccs educational program at the following national, international, and regional veterinary meetings: spring ce program, vmx, wvc, wsava, eveccs, cvc, midwest veterinary conference, and others.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 74% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.8%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 81.3%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.3%; rating input score 99; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.1%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.07; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.3%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.8% of revenue deployed · 81.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $5.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $304K · 10 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.