Institute for Family Development
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 911158512
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Federal Way, WA, USA
- Phone
- 2538743630
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Behavioral Science
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $11,487,721
- Expenses
- $11,572,455
- Assets
- $8,235,014
- Liabilities
- $1,514,556
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOHN STEWART (TRUSTEE AND PRESIDENT)
- ROSEMARY FRAINE (VICE PRESIDENT)
- CHARLOTTE BOOTH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- CHARLOTTE BOOTH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $226,769 total reported compensation
- SHELLEY LEAVITT (ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR): $131,605 total reported compensation
- MARY FISCHER (ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR): $131,605 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The institute for family development keeps children safe and families together by strengthening families through evidence based, culturally responsive, in home services for families facing safety and stability challenges. Ifd also supports high fidelity implementation of family preservation services through training, consultation, and site development.
What it reported doing in 2024
Clinical services - ifd provided evidence based, culturally responsive, in home clinical and family support services to families whose children faced safety or stability risks, including risk of out of home placement. Services were delivered in families' homes and communities and focused on strengthening parenting capacity, improving child safety, stabilizing crises, and supporting family functioning. As part of service delivery, ifd provided concrete supports, such as assistance with basic needs (food, shelter, etc.), when necessary to promote safety and stability. (see schedule i).
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 78% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 91
- Transparency & Controls: 75
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 32
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 90.4%; rating input score 90
- Program expense ratio: 89.5%; rating input score 90
- Fundraising efficiency: $29,456.33 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -0.7%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.71; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.4%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 90.4% of revenue deployed · 89.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $10.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $227K · 17 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.