Buncombe Alternatives Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
561337121
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2011
Location
Asheville, NC, USA
Phone
8287760173
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$335,016
Expenses
$324,451
Assets
$98,192
Liabilities
$25,344

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kyle Hovermale (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Karen Peerson (Executive Dir.): $76,874 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Community-based corrections for juveniles

What it reported doing in 2024

Buncombe County Teen Court: Teen court is an innovative diversion program which alllows first-time juvenile violators of the law to come before a jury of their peers in a court hearing instead of going to Juvenile Court. The defendant must admit guilt during the intake interview in order to participate. Teen court stresses the importance of positive peer pressure through restorative justice to help correct illegal behavior. Teen Court reinforces positive behavior while encourgaging accountability. Teen Court also teaches youth volunteers the Jury the responsibility of citizenship or how to act for the common good. During FY 2024-2025, Buncombe Alternatives served 150 school-based teens.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 97% 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.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.4%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 89.2%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.2%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.7%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.7% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.4% of revenue deployed · 89.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $289K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $77K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.