First Judicial District Casa-gal Program

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810523987
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Helena, MT, USA
Phone
4064570797
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Child Abuse, Prevention

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$266,245
Expenses
$191,149
Assets
$523,468
Liabilities
$4,441

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CATHERINE DAY (PRESIDENT)
  • KRISTEN MCLAUGHLIN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • TAMMY HEIGH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • TAMMY HEIGH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $65,559 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of casa (court appointed special advocates) is to provide volunteer guardians to work on behalf of abused and neglected children to promote their best interests in the pursuit of safe, permanent homes.we envision a world in which every child in the first judicial district court system will have a casa volunteer to give them a voice and provide what they believe is in the best interest of the child to the judges who appoint them.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community education and outreach: staff and volunteers attend meetings and events while sharing brochures and educational materials with the public to raise awareness of how they and casa address the abused and neglected children in the community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 44.3%; rating input score 44
  • Program expense ratio: 59%; rating input score 59
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.82 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 28.2%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.74; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 34.3%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 44.3% of revenue deployed · 59% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $113K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $66K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 44/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 44/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.