Crime Victim Services Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411735676
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2011
Forms available
Form 990 2011, Form 990-EZ 2009
Location
New Ulm, MN, USA
Phone
5072763805
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Victims' Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$440
Expenses
$113,674
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

1)design, implement, manage and coordinate programs for victims in brown, nicollet and sibley counties; 2) provide advocacy services, support, education and community resourse referrals to victims in brown, nicollet and sibley counties; 3) provide education and training to criminal justice professionals, social service agencies, school and community organizations regarding issues impacting crime victims; and 4) perform such functions either directly or by making or providing donations, gifts, grants, contributions, loans, guarantees or subsidies out of the net income or principal assets of the corporation or both.

What it reported doing in 2011

Provide advocacy services, support, education and referrals to victims of crime in brown, sibley and nicollet counties. Also provide training thru a training academy.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 8
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: Limited
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -25,735%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -78.6% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -84.4% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $114K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 10 of 10 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2010 to 2011
  • 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.

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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.