Healthy Families Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
460483687
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Lincoln, NE, USA
Phone
4024889463
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$150,753
Expenses
$175,047
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MIKE EPSTEIN (President)
  • NANCY RITCHIE (Vice President)

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Healthy Families Project is a Family-to-Family Service and Support

What it reported doing in 2016

Family mentoring and related programs

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 69% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 9
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.3%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 50.9%; rating input score 51
  • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: -16.1%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 38%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11.5% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.8% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -39.5% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58.3% of revenue deployed · 50.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $89K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $49K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2013 to 2016
  • 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 58/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 51/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.