Harbour House Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
562028038
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014, Form 990-N 2009
Location
Oxford, NC, USA
Phone
9196031522
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Family Violence Shelters

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$81,631
Expenses
$79,176
Assets
$1,653
Liabilities
$12,977

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

People named in this filing

  • J PHILLIP BETTS (CHAIRMAN)
  • ANGELA HARRIS (EXECUTIVE DI)
  • TERESA BETTS (BOARD MEMBER)

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 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provides safe haven living for men, women, and children who are in need in the area.

What it reported doing in 2014

Operation of thrift store and shelters

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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and assets have declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 95.9%; rating input score 96
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.02; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 7.85; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -74.5% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93% of revenue deployed · 95.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $76K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2012 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.