Every Shelter Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 832501756
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Houston, TX, USA
- Phone
- 8322058682
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,251,301
- Expenses
- $1,042,523
- Assets
- $754,745
- Liabilities
- $126,461
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Carly Seidewand Eppley (President)
- Scott Key (Vice President)
- Joe Meppelink (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Scott Key (Vice President): $153,151 total reported compensation
- Austin Hermann (Chief of Staff/Secretary): $117,301 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Every Shelter's mission is to build a localized refugee-aid ecosystem centered around the needs, preferences, and aspirations of refugees.
What it reported doing in 2024
Our advocacy efforts focus on raising awareness about the urgent shelter and housing needs of refugees in Uganda and around the world, drawing on our direct field experience in deploying shelter solutions in refugee camps and settlements. We engage in public education and awareness campaigns, share technical expertise, and partner-building to advocate for and create improved shelter options for individuals and communities affected by forced displacement. These activities directly support our mission by leveraging our practical shelter expertise to address systemic gaps in refugee housing and protection.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 85% 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 65
- Transparency & Controls: 73
- Accountability: 80
- Sustainability: 49
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 65%; rating input score 65
- Program expense ratio: 78%; rating input score 78
- Fundraising efficiency: $7.48 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- 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: 99.4%; rating input score 99; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 16.7%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.72; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 25.9%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 18.5% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 26.4% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 44.1% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 65% of revenue deployed · 78% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $813K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $153K · 14 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.