Wisconsin Puppy Mill Project Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
562482299
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Sheboygan, WI, USA
Phone
9207836427
Rating
41
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal Protection and Welfare

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$176,700
Expenses
$189,275
Assets
$10,445
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LOUISE HANSEN (PRESIDENT)
  • PAT CREAN (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • LOUISE HANSEN (PRESIDENT)
  • M JENNY EDWARDS (SECRETARY/TREASURER)
  • PAT CREAN (VICE PRESIDENT)

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

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

Overview

Mission

To provide public education about the humane treatment of animals, animal cruelty and puppy mills, to provide resources to rescued animals, to assist pet owners, shelters and rescue organizations with spay and neuter assistance, and to provide supplies, services and education to pet owners and care givers in need.

What it reported doing in 2024

To provide public education on the humane treatment of animals, to rescue and give care to homeless animals, and to provide resources for pet owners, animal shelters, humane organizations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.1%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.06; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.9% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.