Friends of the Mission

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911834006
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Woodland, CA, USA
Phone
9164160901
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Philanthropy, Voluntarism, and Grantmaking Foundations N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,097,415
Expenses
$1,623,147
Assets
$33,167,449
Liabilities
$4,557,566

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • EDWARD SHELLY (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • EDWARD SHELLY (PRESIDENT)
  • JANET RUGGIERO (DIRECTOR)
  • LOUIS RAMIREZ (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Friends of the mission is a non-profit organization that provides affordable housing for individuals, families and youth who are in need, but especially the homeless population in yolo county. Affordable housing may include emergency, transitional, supportive and permanent housing projects and programs.

What it reported doing in 2024

As part of the broader purpose of providing a place for the homeless and those marginalized by society due to mental illness or drug and alcohol addictions, friends of the mission is a participant in the woodland collaborative - a public-private partnership with a mission to create an economically viable and programmatically sound solution to the increased number of individuals and families living homeless in woodland, California. Starting in 2020, the woodland collaborative constructed the east beamer way emergency 100 bed shelter and continued the planning process for a 60- unit affordable housing project, a 60-bed treatment program and a 12-unit affordable housing site. The shelter project was complete as of december 2020. The affordable housing project was completed in october 2022. The treatment program and the 12 unit affordable project are scheduled to be completed in 2025.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 91% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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

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: 39
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 94
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 12.7%; rating input score 13
  • Program expense ratio: 94.2%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 51.5%; rating input score 52; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 86.6%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 20.43; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20.6% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 33.5% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.3% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 12.7% of revenue deployed · 94.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $822K reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 13/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 52/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.