Dear Dinah Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
863992353
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2022
Location
New Carlisle, OH, USA
Phone
9377512644
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$690,683
Expenses
$198,743
Assets
$910,290
Liabilities
$106,554

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Amanda Reed (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Amanda Reed (Executive Director): $30,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Dear Dinahs mission is to create a safe place for survivors of human trafficking and to help raise awareness byconnecting a community of people who are devoted to protecting and empowering survivors of trafficking.

What it reported doing in 2025

We do Restoration, Rescue and Recovery. We assisted appoximately 800 Survivors Restoration - providing a supportive community to foster growth in the areas of independence, healing, and long term growth. Rescue - crisis intervention for victims of human trafficking. Including transportation, relocation, and supportive resources. Recovery - soft hand offs and support to short and long term recovery programs. Supportive services include building community, lasting throughout the duration of any recovery program in which a victim or survivor is committed to..

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 34
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 19.7%; rating input score 20
  • Program expense ratio: 68.6%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 71.2%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.58; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.1%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 76.1% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 85% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 100.2% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 19.7% of revenue deployed · 68.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $136K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $30K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.