Community Youth Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
910859922
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Olympia, WA, USA
Phone
3609430780
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Children's, Youth Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$15,172,745
Expenses
$14,476,780
Assets
$12,936,313
Liabilities
$4,930,947

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEVEN ROSS (PRESIDENT)
  • MISON BOWDEN (PRESIDENT ELECT)
  • RUBY MARTIN (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • DEREK HARRIS (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • DEREK HARRIS (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $175,308 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Empowers youth at-risk and their families to meet goals for safety, stability, belonging and success by providing a continuum of individualized services and advocacy.

What it reported doing in 2024

High risk youth programs provides direct support, immediate crisis intervention, and appropriate referrals to street affected, runaway, gang involved and other at-risk youth who are exiting institutions, homeless, vulnerable, or in imminent crisis. Rosie's place and young adult shelter are a daytime drop-in/resource center and an overnight shelter offering meals, counseling, hygiene, laundry services and direct access to a wide variety of community-based services for homeless and at-risk youth.

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 the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 50
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.6%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 75.2%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.45 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th 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: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.6%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.89; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.2%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.6% of revenue deployed · 75.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $10.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $175K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $1.3M reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 57/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.