Beautiful Redemption

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
473730396
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Palmer Lake, CO, USA
Phone
7196592781
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$910,104
Expenses
$748,724
Assets
$426,816
Liabilities
$14,047

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MIKE WORLEY (PRESIDENT/CE)

Highest reported compensation

  • MIKE WORLEY (PRESIDENT/CE): $192,090 total reported compensation
  • STEVE RINGLESPAUGH (BD MMBR/DIR): $123,540 total reported compensation
  • CHRIS LINDGREN (BD MMBR/OUTR): $105,854 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Beautiful redemption is the bridge between the faith community and meeting the needs of foster children. We connect the faith community to requests that come from the desk of dhs and the system we use is the only one of its kind. We speak to thousands each year raising awareness to foster care needs, recruiting foster parents and help form wrap around support communities for foster families.

What it reported doing in 2024

Foster family assistance step one - we are the bridge that connects our most needy children & families to community members who want to help. Step two - wrap around services for foster care families. We partner with fostering hope to do this well. Step three - recruit foster parents. We partner with hope & home to accomplish this.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 86% 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 - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 57
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 64%; rating input score 64
  • Program expense ratio: 77.8%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.87 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 92%; rating input score 92; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 44.4%; rating input score 44; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.7%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.57; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 56.3%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.9% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.4% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.2% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 64% of revenue deployed · 77.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $582K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $192K · 9 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 37/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.