Hall County Community Collaborative

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
465573732
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2021
Forms available
Form 990 2021, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Grand Island, NE, USA
Phone
3089309038
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$368,420
Expenses
$388,186
Assets
$-47,660
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RANDY SEE (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • SAFFRON BUETTNER (EXECUTIVE DI): $38,935 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To see safe, healthy and thriving communities and families

What it reported doing in 2021

Community well being funding was used for direct services for central navigation, primarily for familes with children under 18. The funding includes assistance for behavioral health, daily living, housing, parenting, transportation, utilities, and physical/dental health. This funding also provides facilitation for circle of security parenting classes; discovery kids, a free seven-week prevention education program for youth in grades 2-5; family navigators, an individualized needs/goals partnership to connect families to vital resources; host homes, a short- term intervention for youth who are currently experiencing homelessness; and parent connectors, a telephone mentoring program that supports parents of current middle school students with emotional or behavioral issues.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 86% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 14
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 77.8%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 76.9%; rating input score 77; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.4%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: -0.12; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -17.5% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -27.5% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -109.8% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82% of revenue deployed · 77.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 13 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $302K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $39K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2018 to 2021
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.