3 Angels Children & Family Services Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510654065
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Napa, CA, USA
Phone
7078158244
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Foster Care

Reported finances

Revenue
$117,354
Expenses
$631,651
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JULIENNE K MCQUEENEY (FINANCIAL EMPLOYEE): $92,700 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Activities ceased 12/31/2022 but some carryover financial items occurred in 2023.

What it reported doing in 2023

Activites ceased.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 88% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 45
  • Sustainability: 3
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 79.2%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -438.2%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.7%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 79.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 2 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $500K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $93K · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.