Wwwpilotsnpawsorg Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 263754228
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2013, Form 990-N 2007
- Location
- Landrum, SC, USA
- Phone
- 8648955234
- Rating
- 61
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Animal Protection and Welfare
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $627,108
- Expenses
- $279,830
- Assets
- $4,076,288
- Liabilities
- $4,982
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- KATHLEEN QUINN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- DEBORAH BOIES (PRESIDENT)
- JON WELLS (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- KATHLEEN QUINN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $179,006 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Providing a web based forum in which individuals and organizations can communicate for the purpose of transporting animals in need of movement from one location to another in the form of general and commercial aviation
What it reported doing in 2025
Pilots n paws is a 501c3 charitable organization who through the help of general aviation volunteer pilots transport rescue animals by air free of charge. The mission of pilots n paws is to provide a user-friendly website communication venue between those that rescue, shelter, and foster animals and pilots and plane owners willing to assist with the transportation of these animals. The goal of pilots n paws is to continue to promote awareness of animal overpopulation and to implement education programs to end this problem in our lifetime. Disaster relief response is also part of our mission. Approximately 16,000 animals were provided with transportation in 2024.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 83% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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 most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 49
- Transparency & Controls: 60
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 80
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 44.4%; rating input score 44
- Program expense ratio: 74.7%; rating input score 75
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- 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: 55.4%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.57; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 64%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 18.1% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 44.4% of revenue deployed · 74.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $209K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $179K · 4 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
- 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.
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 44/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.