Capacity Path Relief Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
843975716
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Saint Petersburg, FL, USA
Phone
8504262327
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Disaster Preparedness and Relief Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$251,354
Expenses
$148,537
Assets
$111,747
Liabilities
$243

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kerry Umphrey (Vice President)
  • Ami E Readdy Leigh (President)

People named in this filing

  • Kerry Umphrey (Vice President)
  • Betsy Welle (Treasurer)
  • Sean Wyman (Secretary)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Capacity Path Relief is a 501(c)3 charitable corporation that helps communities heal from catastrophic events, like natural disasters.

What it reported doing in 2025

Capacity Path Relief was the recipient of a grant from the Florida disaster fund to provide Disaster recovery services to persons and organizations that were impacted by hurricanes Helene and Milton. We were able to provide over 70 resiliency workshops and work with more than 2000 individuals directly on this project in 2025. We did group debriefing and supported social service organizations across 11 counties. The remaining grant funds will be used in 2026 to support the mental health and psychosocial resilience of the disaster caseworkers continuing to manage the landscape of disaster survivors across the state of Florida.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 99% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.7%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 95.9%; rating input score 96
  • 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 40.9%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.75; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 50% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 49.2% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.7% of revenue deployed · 95.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $142K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.