Court Appointed Special Advocates of Missoula

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810482945
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Missoula, MT, USA
Phone
4065421208
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$555,600
Expenses
$515,185
Assets
$703,470
Liabilities
$73,104

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANIEL LEE (Vice President)
  • KIM KLAGES JOHNS (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • SCOTT APPEL (Executive Dir.): $79,351 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 independent, trained advocates for the best interests of children within the judicial system who are at substantial risk or have experienced abuse or neglect, and to provide consistent, long-term advocacy until every child resides in a safe, permanent home.

What it reported doing in 2024

Court Appointed Special Advocates of Missoula (CASA) is a nonprofit organization incorporated in the state of Montana in 1994. The organization recruits, trains, and supervises community volunteers to provide a voice for children in the 4th judicial district who have experienced abuse and neglect, and are in the child welfare system. CASA volunteers also assist in ensuring that the health, education, and permanency needs of these children are met. CASA is supported primarily through public and private grants and donor contributions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 65% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.5%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 82.7%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.74 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th 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: 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: 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.3%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.37; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.4%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.8% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.5% of revenue deployed · 82.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $426K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $79K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.