Skip to content
Charity Transparency ProfileTax year 2025

FLYING TAILS INC

EIN 93-1420194 · CA · General animal shelters and rescues

Verified by bounded review · fast ai · Verified Jul 28, 2026

Summary header

Current result

81

B

Confidence

Low confidence

Coverage state

Automated Limited Rating

Latest form

Form 990

Latest verified tax period

Dec 31, 2025

Filing status checked

Jul 28, 2026

Rating updated

Aug 4, 2026

Filing date

Not published

Peer context

Fallback baseline

charity-peer-benchmark-fallback-v1-3ec8917eb18774cad827

Methodology version

ct-v1.3-zero-contribution-revenue

Data source

Published section data

Published rating filing basis

Rating basis tax period: Dec 31, 2025

Currentness: current scoreable 990 · Eligibility: eligible form 990

Form type verified: Jul 28, 2026

Cash vs. noncash breakdown

The launch methodology keeps the headline contribution number visible, but also shows how much appears to be cash-like support that can more directly anchor donor interpretation.

Total reported contributions

$0

Noncash / in-kind contributions

$0

Estimated cash-like contributions

$0

Explanation panel

Automated scoring time: Less than 1 second

Deterministic methodology rescore from persisted canonical metrics

Information reviewed

    FLYING TAILS INC's 4 available financial-transparency categories cover 68% of methodology weight. Their normalized total is 80.88, rounded to 81 (B).

    Confidence note: Confidence is low because the filing reports zero contributions. Revenue-based management and executive ratios are disclosed, while contribution-specific categories remain unavailable rather than being scored as zero.

    Peer-context note: This profile currently uses a fallback baseline, which is disclosed so donors can see when cohort depth is strong and when the model is falling back to a broader baseline.

    Management Burden

    This category scored 90 under ct-v1.3-zero-contribution-revenue.

    A

    90

    Weight 22%

    Executive Compensation Burden

    This category scored 100 under ct-v1.3-zero-contribution-revenue.

    A

    100

    Weight 12%

    Fundraising Efficiency

    This category was unavailable from the current filing and was excluded rather than scored as zero.

    Not scored

    —

    Weight 16%

    In-Kind Distortion

    This category was unavailable from the current filing and was excluded rather than scored as zero.

    Not scored

    —

    Weight 16%

    Transparency & Governance

    This category scored 40 under ct-v1.3-zero-contribution-revenue.

    F

    40

    Weight 18%

    Financial Resilience

    This category scored 100 under ct-v1.3-zero-contribution-revenue.

    A

    100

    Weight 16%

    Category context and cautions

    • low severity

      Zero-contribution revenue scoring basis

      The filing reports zero contributions. Total revenue was used as the denominator for management burden and executive compensation burden. Contribution-specific fundraising and in-kind categories remained unavailable and were not scored as zero.

    Multi-year trend

    The launch view keeps a textual trend table so the pattern stays readable without depending on a chart alone.

    YearOverallCash-like supportMgmt burdenExec burdenIn-kindCoverage
    202581$090100—Automated Limited Rating

    Source-grounded citations

    These public-record references back the visible identity and financial figures. The public profile stays citation-first rather than narrative-only.

      Within this section

      Use the directory for broader browsing, the compare view for side-by-side context, and the methodology page when you need the scoring rules behind the visible profile.

      Financial transparency first

      This section's launch frame is financial transparency, not a complete impact evaluation. A strong score here does not mean every program outcome question is settled.

      Read methodology

      Cash, in-kind, and labor context

      Not all salaries are overhead, and headline revenue can mislead when noncash support is large. The public profiles keep both cautions visible instead of collapsing them into one blunt ratio.

      Compare charities