Alternatives to Family Violence

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
840766984
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2010
Forms available
Form 990 2010
Location
Commerce City, CO, USA
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Family Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$917,554
Expenses
$921,334
Assets
$248,413
Liabilities
$54,946

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To eliminate domestic violence by providing safety and empowerment to those affected while promoting nonviolence as a social value through the operation of a crisis line and safe-house and providing community outreach and support services

What it reported doing in 2010

Provided emergency housing for battered women and their children for up to 120 days and 24 hour counseling interventions and referral services to family members experiencing domestic violence 125 women and 68 children received 4882 nights of sa fe housing staff answered 4315 calls and provided immediate crisis intervention for 2212 callers counseling for 1130 callers and information and referrals for 3310 callers provided long-term individual and group therapy for women and child ren including restraining orders housing assistance and advocacy services 514 women adolescents children and men received 4683 hours of counseling 156 volunteers provided 1395 hours of support

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 69% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 60th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.4%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.27; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $796K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.