Family Support Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943108205
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oakland, CA, USA
Phone
5108342443
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Foster Care

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,955,422
Expenses
$5,512,555
Assets
$4,764,347
Liabilities
$1,816,439

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kamara Rose (Board Vice President)
  • Greg Garrett (Chief Executive Officer)
  • Janette Drew (Interim CEO/Board President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Oscar Luna (Chief Financial Officer): $165,469 total reported compensation
  • Janette Drew (Interim CEO/Board President): $151,183 total reported compensation
  • Donna Marie Austin Moore (Kinship Program Director): $149,265 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Family Support Services's programs serve families, youth and children whose health and welfare are vulnerable as a result of a variety of circumstances. We provide assistance to families struggling to take care of children who are medically fragile, in foster care, or have developmental disabilities; we offer supportive services to grandparents and other relatives who provide an alternative to traditional foster care; we intervene in and prevent maltreatment of children in families that have been identified as being at high risk by local counties; and we provide mentoring, after-school and summer programming to foster children and youth.

What it reported doing in 2024

Family Preservation Services -Family Support Services (FSS) provides home, office and community-based support services to Regional Center of the East Bay (RCEB) families who have children with disabilities in their care. The program provides support that helps students overcome barriers to school attendance and educational challenges in Alameda County Office of Education (ACOE) School Districts. Our Growing Up Strong (GUS) Program provides therapeutic services to children who are experiencing emotional, behavioral or social challenges. The GUS Program also provides family therapy and collateral services to the children's parents/caregivers. In our Child Abuse Prevention Intervention Treatment (CAPIT) American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Program, we provided financial support and case management to families, youth and children that are underserved in the community that are resource deprived. The Encouraging Parents in the Community (EPIC) Fathers Program provided support and a space for fathers and father figures in the community to discuss their challenges as they strive to overcome the impact of trauma on parenting and connection with their children. Program Services Accomplishments:1. Regional Center of the East Bay (RCEB) Family Collaborative Program provided support to approximately 96 families and 101 children.2. Positive Attendance Care Team (PACT) Program provided support to approximately 62 students.3. Growing Up Strong (GUS) Program - provided services to 7 families4. Child Abuse Prevention Intervention Treatment (CAPIT) American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Program provided support to approximately 78 families and 115 children 5. Encouraging Parents in the Community (EPIC) Fathers provided support to approximately 48 fathers and 96 children. We had about 40 sessions for about a total of 100 hours.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 79% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.9%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 86.9%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $220.02 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 92; 92nd 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; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 7.4%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.86; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.7%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.9% of revenue deployed · 86.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $4.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $165K · 12 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $165K reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.