Bi-stone Casa

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
882982336
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Mexia, TX, USA
Phone
2546009909
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$281,764
Expenses
$301,732
Assets
$118,436
Liabilities
$17,271

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • ASHLEY GOMEZ (Executive Dir.): $78,876 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To recruit, train and supervise court-appointed advocates who provide constancy for abused and neglected children and youth while advocating for services and placement in safe and permanent homes.

What it reported doing in 2024

Casa advocates are court-appointed volunteers who stand on behalf of a child in the custody of the department of family protective services (child protective services) during court proceedings. The casa visits monthly with the child, placement, biological parents, and cps caseworker. Additionally, the casa make quarterly contact with anyone connected with the child's education, medical, and psychological services and with the attorney ad litem assigned to the case. The casa informs the judge, in a written court report and through oral testimony in court, how the child is doing and wheter the child is having his/her physical, emotional, and educational needs met.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 61% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.2%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 85.1%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.1%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.39; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.1%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 104.5% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 36.1% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 28.8% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.2% of revenue deployed · 85.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 11 board members independent · 0 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $257K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $79K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.