Vetpaw Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 464641830
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2020
- Forms available
- Form 990 2020, Form 990-N 2015
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Phone
- 2282290478
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Wildlife Preservation, Protection
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $602,837
- Expenses
- $705,373
- Assets
- $121,348
- Liabilities
- $60,062
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RYAN TATE (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- RYAN TATE (PRESIDENT): $27,100 total reported compensation
- MARK GOFF (DIRECTOR): $8,400 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Vetpaw; veterans empowered to protect wildlife. We are a 501(3)(c) non- profit organization with the mission of protecting, preserving and defending african wildlife through the empowerment of local african park rangers. With this mission in mind our goal is to utilize post 9/11 us veterans with combat skills who are committed to protecting and training park rangers to help aid in the combat of poaching on the ground in africa.
What it reported doing in 2020
Train local rangers your donations go directly toward training local park rangers free of charge to work better, smarter and faster using the best techniques available. Our training and expertise empowers local forces to maximize the positive impact they are already working so hard to achieve.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 94% 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 - 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 the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 51
- Accountability: 79
- Sustainability: 15
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 97.1%; rating input score 97
- Program expense ratio: 83.2%; rating input score 83
- Fundraising efficiency: $9.06 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
- 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: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Limited
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -17%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.17; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.49; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 15.2% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 97.1% of revenue deployed · 83.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $587K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $27K · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2016 to 2020
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.