Wisconsin Academy for Graduate Service Dogs Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391626569
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Madison, WI, USA
Phone
6082509247
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$321,061
Expenses
$245,546
Assets
$215,088
Liabilities
$74,197

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Patrick Hereley (President)

People named in this filing

  • Patrick Hereley (President)
  • Jill Wheeler (Director)
  • Nick George (Secretary/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. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

WAGS mission is to promote functional independence and improved quality of life for persons with physical mobility impairments through partnerships with highly skilled service dogs.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Wisconsin Academy for Graduate Service Dogs (WAGS) raises and trains service dogs to increase the ability of people with disabilities to independently execute functional, daily living skills, increase attendance in daily life events and improve outlook on life with the aid and support of a highly trained service dog. WAGS has facilitated the partnership of more than 150 service dogs with people with disabilities of movement such as multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injuries, neuromuscular disease and cerebral palsy.

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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.7%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 81.9%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.87 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 23.5%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.88; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.34; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.7% of revenue deployed · 81.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $201K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.