Childrens Advocacy Center of Smith County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
752748697
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Tyler, TX, USA
Phone
9035331880
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Child Abuse, Prevention

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,175,099
Expenses
$4,499,789
Assets
$11,491,032
Liabilities
$2,941,416

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

Leadership & pay

27 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TERRI SMITH (CEO)
  • COURTNEY LOGGINS (Vice President)
  • CHRIS PHILLIPS (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • TERRI SMITH (CEO): $210,657 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The children's advocacy center of smith county's mission is to protect and restore the lives of abused children through team investigations, healing services, community outreach and strategic partnerships.

What it reported doing in 2025

The child abuse intervention program encompassed forensic interview, case management, therapy, support groups, sexual assault nurse examinations and court preparation & accompaniment which were provided to abused children and their protective caregivers. Community education presentations were made to adults to recognize and report child abuse and to school age children and youth to teach intervention of abuse. Trauma informed programs prepared teachers, and others who work with children and youth, to identify and address trauma and abuse in the classroom. The agency communicated with community members via mailed and emailed correspondence.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.3%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 83.6%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.8%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.55; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.7%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.9% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.2% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.1% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.3% of revenue deployed · 83.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 26 of 26 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $211K · 27 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • 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.
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.