Harm Reduction Coalition of Santa Cruz County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
845048993
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2020–2020
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Santa Cruz, CA, USA
Phone
8314614136
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Reported finances

Revenue
$116,041
Expenses
$58,873
Assets
$57,368
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Kate Garrett (Managing Member/Registered Officer)
  • Daniel Drysdale (SSP Coordinator/Trustee)
  • Alex Burgan (Trustee)

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

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

Overview

Mission

Harm Reduction Coalition of Santa Cruz County operates a state-authorized Syringe Service Program. This program distributes complimentary syringes, sharps containers, wound care items, etc. to low-income and homeless individuals in our county. HRCSCC also disposes of used syringes collected. The purpose of these activities is to reduce overdose rates, reduce rates of infectious diseases, and improve health outcomes in our community.

What it reported doing in 2020

HRCSCC's only program is our Syringe Service Program. This program saw about 200 unique individuals in 2020. The program collects used syringes from participants and dispenses clean syringes, naloxone, sharps containers, wound care items, etc. This program also provides education to our participants on safer using and overdose response and prevention.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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 a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 50.7%; rating input score 51
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 49.3%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.97; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.9%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 50.7% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $59K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • 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 51/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.