Gerard's House

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742834283
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Santa Fe, NM, USA
Phone
5054241800
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Counseling, Support Groups

Reported finances

Revenue
$761,369
Expenses
$605,495
Assets
$838,388
Liabilities
$22,722

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RICHARD WHITE (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • NICOLE MAES GONZALES (EXECUTIVE DI): $97,884 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Gerard's house is a safe space for grieving children, teenagers and families where healing happens through acceptance and peer support.

What it reported doing in 2025

Gerards house provides safe places for grieving children, youth and families where healing happens through acceptance and peer support. When a child or teenager experiences the death or separation of a parent or other loved one, adults in their lives often want to help but are not sure how. Thats where gerards house comes in. We offer free, weekly support groups that normalize the grief process and provide ways to heal, including art, play and memorializing rituals. In groups youth can be with peers who have also experienced life-changing loss and know they are not alone. In 2025,85% of the individuals our organization serves are living in poverty. As a result, gerards house services are holistic in that we address as many needs as possible for the families who participate. In many programs we administer needs assessments and connect caregivers with appropriate resources whether it's through food drives and financial assistance from gerards house or via our collaborative partners. For everything from family therapy services to rental assistance, participants can trust gerards house to accompany them without fear of judgment. In 2025, gerards house facilitated 28 weekly grief groups on-site, throughout santa fe public schools and has since expanded into the espaola valley and surrounding pueblos. Over the year, we supported more than 1,700 children, teens, and adults with free grief support services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.

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: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 55.8%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 70%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.39 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.5%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.38; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.2%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.2% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 55.8% of revenue deployed · 70% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $424K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $98K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 39/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.