Dignity First

What it reported doing in 2025

Dignity First was created to work on the problem of homelessness in the Bangor area. Our goal is to replicate the Community First! Village out of Austin, TX in a way that will best serve the needs here in Maine. This village plan provides not only housing, but a supportive community that surrounds all residents. It has intentional neighbors who choose to join the community that surrounds all the residents. It has intentional neighbors who choose to join the previously unhoused neighbors and live side-by-side with them. We know lack of housing in Maine and across the USA is a huge problem and only growing worse. This project aims to alleviate some of the pressures on the lower end of the housing market in our area. We also know that homelessness affects our entire community, not only those by it physically. Because we don't yet have the funding to create the village, we are currently working to build a support system tat can help people being housed by other organizations, so that we will be prepared with our community once we have obtained the spot fo the physical village to be located. There are many providers working already in Bangor, and are intent is not to replace them, but to join with them and create a network of support for those in need. Meanwhile, we also have taken on small support roles for a select few individuals needing help over the 5+ years we've been working, with help getting into housing via security deposits, phone minutes, and morale boosting and cheerleading. Until 'Camp Hope' was disbursed, we provided a hot meal once a month to residents campting there with volunteer help. We also volunteer with other organizations supporting recover, food, art, and other help for unhoused and tenantively housed/low income neighbors whenever we can.

Financial Efficiency

• Mission deployment rate: 98.3%; rating input score 98
• Program expense ratio: 85.5%; rating input score 86
• Fundraising efficiency: $18.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 64; 64th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
• Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
  • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
  • Whistleblower policy: Pass
  • 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: -15%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
• Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.21; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
• Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
• Officer compensation ratio: 13.4%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

• Program expense growth: -108.7% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
• Revenue growth: -150.7% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
• Asset growth: -4% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings