Elizabeth Gregory Home

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
912139335
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2011
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2067290262
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Family Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,786,455
Expenses
$1,382,593
Assets
$3,555,105
Liabilities
$413,090

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Ally Baehr (Executive Director)
  • Jillian Jones (President)
  • Erica Marley (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Ally Baehr (Executive Director): $130,204 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Elizabeth Gregory Home provides a welcoming and respectful refuge where women who are experiencing homelessness, trauma, or economic insecurity have access to a caring community and critical resources.

What it reported doing in 2025

EGH's Transitional House affords ten single, adult women experiencing homelessness a place to live for up to two years. This environment prepares women to be self-sustaining, independent, and have safe lives. EGH aspires to ensure that 100 percent of the women who leave the transitional house for permanent housing will never be homeless again. In order to achieve this goal, EGH offers help in four critical areas: attaining permanent housing, building financial stability, maintaining social connections, and developing interpersonal skills. In addition to educational opportunities, residents also gain essential practical experience through volunteering or employment opportunities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 88% 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: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 72
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 42.2%; rating input score 42
  • Program expense ratio: 83.9%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $22.87 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 63; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 50.4%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.57; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.4%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.9% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 42.2% of revenue deployed · 83.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $130K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 42/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.