Family Resource Center Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311599581
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
3033881001
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,729,857
Expenses
$1,605,358
Assets
$262,316
Liabilities
$165,519

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES HENDERSON (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MANDY WATROUS-GALE (EXECUTIVE DI): $116,332 total reported compensation
  • TERI HAYMOND (CO-EXEC DIRE): $114,381 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To strengthen families through partnership and collaboration.

What it reported doing in 2024

Frca's Colorado family support assessment 2.0 (cfsa 2.0) survey is the primary tool member centers use to guide conversations and set goals with families. The tool tracks family progress toward economic security and health across 14 different domains. Additionally, the tool incorporates the five protective factors survey which assesses elements that prevent child maltreatment. After years of analysis and evaluation of the aggregate information gathered from members, the cfsa 2.0 has been identified as a reliable, evidence-based tool available for broad use on the evidence-based clearinghouse for child welfare. Use of the tool is proven to have positive outcomes for families. ----------- see schedule o ------------------

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 65% for direct work, and 35% for grants.

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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 78.6%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.42 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98%; rating input score 98; 46th 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.2%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.16; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.63; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.4%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11.5% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.7% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -12% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73% of revenue deployed · 78.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $116K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 36 of 37 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 23 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 18 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 32/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.