Crisis Pregnancy Center of Tidewater Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
541267311
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Chesapeake, VA, USA
Phone
7574109703
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Reproductive Health Care Facilities and Allied Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,822,590
Expenses
$3,634,203
Assets
$5,389,918
Liabilities
$1,306,990

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DOUGLAS R DEBAUSE (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DOUGLAS R DEBAUSE (PRESIDENT): $218,328 total reported compensation
  • JANET KEIM (DIRECTOR): $14,080 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The crisis pregnancy center of tidewater (cpc) is a christ-centered organization whose mission is to reach out to those women and families involved in crisis-related pregnancies offering them real help for the present, hope for the future, and healing for their past.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization provided its clients one or more of the following: free medical clinic, ultrasound services, pregnancy testing, information about pregnancy, fetal development, abortion alternatives, sexual integrity, preparation for childbirth, medical referrals. The organization received approximately 6,887 calls from women and supported approximately 2,628 women.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 79% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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 the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 85
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 85.7%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.3 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 57.8%; rating input score 58; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.9%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.48; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.24; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.4%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.9% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.4% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82% of revenue deployed · 85.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $218K · 11 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
  • 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 42/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 58/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.