Good Shepherd Residential Treatment Centre Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
760635536
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Tomball, TX, USA
Phone
2813740777
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Protection Against Abuse

Reported finances

Revenue
$0
Expenses
$260,692
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • DR JACK C HINDS (DIRECTOR): $150,000 total reported compensation
  • DYANNE CLARK (DIRECTOR): $87,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Good shepherd residential treatment centre, inc. Is a Texas non-profit, tax exempt organization whose sole purpose was to provide total life-care, educational and counseling activities to displaced emotionally disturbed and learning disabled adolescent males aged 7 years through 17 years. Children were placed in the good shepherd children's home by (cps) child protective services and county/state juvenile probation departments. Good shepherd residential treatment centre, inc. Was licensed by the Texas department of protective and regulatory services: licensed facility 548412, the Texas commission on alcohol and drug abuse (tcada) as a clinical health care provider for treatment of alcohol and drug related dysfunctions; tcada license 2079-a and additionally licensed as a clinical training institution to provide on-site dyadic training and supervision for lcdc students and associate degree chemical dependency counselors tcada license 1974-a. During our twenty-first and final year of oper

What it reported doing in 2020

During our twenty first year of operations we have finalized closing, paid all debts and distributed the remaining cash to other charitable organizations.

Operating model

Revenue model
No positive adjusted resources. The filing reports no positive adjusted operating resources.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 2
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 10
  • Sustainability: 1
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: 2.7%; rating input score 3
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: Limited
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 91.1%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -31.7% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -16.3% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -11.6% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 2.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $7K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $150K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2010 to 2020
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.