Concho Valley Turning Point

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
320292036
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2018, Form 990-N 2011
Location
San Angelo, TX, USA
Phone
3256581389
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alcohol, Drug and Substance Abuse, Dependency Prevention and Treatment

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$320,120
Expenses
$181,336
Assets
$596,701
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARIA MEJIA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARIA MEJIA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $56,250 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Concho valley turning point "cvtp" is a non-profit organization that works with adults who have struggles with addiction and other destructive behaviors. Our goal is to help restore and rebuild the lives of those individuals for a better and brighter future. Cvtp helps people become productive in life by addressing barriers of dysfunction through the process of rescuing, restoring, and rebuilding lives.

What it reported doing in 2024

Cvtp provides 3 groups weekly for an average attendance of 73 people per week. These groups use a bible based 12 step program and a group dealing solely with anger management. Cvtp also provides pastoral counseling for individuals and families. Cvtp provides short term housing for homeless males due to release from incarceration as well as other males needing a short term stay that are in part of the cvtp program. Cvtp can serve up to 40 clients at any one time.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 most voting board members are independent. 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: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 40.7%; rating input score 41
  • Program expense ratio: 71.8%; rating input score 72
  • 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 43.4%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.29; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 31%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 23.4% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 40.7% of revenue deployed · 71.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $130K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $56K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.