Comal County Family Violence Shelter
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 742440649
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- New Braunfels, TX, USA
- Phone
- 8306207520
- Rating
- 87
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $6,171,053
- Expenses
- $5,339,099
- Assets
- $10,153,942
- Liabilities
- $5,914,919
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JILL JOHNSON (PRESIDENT)
- JANIS PARSLEY (VICE PRESIDENT)
- JULIE STRENTZSCH (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- JULIE STRENTZSCH (CEO): $99,553 total reported compensation
- VIVIAN PUTNEY (CFO): $61,913 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 provide crisis and prevention services to victims of domestic violence and sexual assault while providing a safe environment where an individual can make educated, unbiased decisions about their future.
What it reported doing in 2024
The crisis center of comal county provided trauma-informed, survivor-centered services to 1,368 total clients, including 1,044 non-residential individuals. We served 324 residential clients who received a total of 36,728 services and a total of 8,034 bed nights. Services include safe shelter support, advocacy (496 services), legal advocacy (542 services), prevention services (1,345 services), counseling (801 services), and safe services and examinations (79 services).the organization also responded to 1,107 hotline calls, 830 were unique callers. Main client populations served included 487 domestic violence survivors, 118 sexual assault survivors, 230 children and 302 unhoused clients. We saw an additional 5,654 individuals for prevention.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 68% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 60% for direct work, and 40% 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. Liabilities are high compared with assets and the available information about grant readiness federal audit leaves an important question unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 77
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 60
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 71.5%; rating input score 72
- Program expense ratio: 78.9%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: $1,175.27 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 98; 98th 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; 72nd 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: 9 of 9 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 13.5%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.9; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.58; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 16.4% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 15.6% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 21.2% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 71.5% of revenue deployed · 78.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $100K · 16 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $2M reported
- Consistency: 38 of 38 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 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: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.