Breaking Free Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 411856806
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Saint Paul, MN, USA
- Phone
- 6516456557
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Family Violence Shelters
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,918,055
- Expenses
- $2,339,953
- Assets
- $491,047
- Liabilities
- $199,833
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Lori Quist (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Lori Quist (Executive Director): $144,544 total reported compensation
- Samantha Jacobson (Finance Director until April 2025): $93,347 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Empowering survivors of sex trafficking and prostitution to build new lives through safe housing, direct services, healing programs, survivor advocacy, worldwide policy change, and hope.
What it reported doing in 2024
Advocacy: Breaking Free expanded access to survivor-centered services this year through the implementation of LIFT, a new virtual support group designed to reduce barriers and increase connection for survivors. LIFT provides participants with a safe, trauma informed space to build community, strengthen coping skills, and access peer support regardless of location, transportation challenges, or safety concerns. By offering this group in a virtual format, Breaking Free has been able to reach survivors who may be unable to participate in in person programming, increasing engagement while responding to evolving survivor needs.This year, Breaking Free also prioritized strengthening our advocacy workforce by investing in expanded training opportunities for our advocates. Staff participated in new, specialized trainings focused on trauma informed care, emerging best practices, and the complex, intersecting needs of survivors. In addition, we broadened our internal training curriculum to ensure advocates are equipped with consistent, high quality tools and knowledge across all programs. These enhancements have increased our organizational capacity, improved service quality, and ensured that survivors receive informed, responsive, and culturally competent support.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 85% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 90
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 13
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 99.9%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 81.9%; rating input score 82
- Fundraising efficiency: $25.35 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -22%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.21; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.41; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.2%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -5.2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 99.9% of revenue deployed · 81.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $145K · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
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.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.