Inwood House

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
135562254
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Dobbs Ferry, NY, USA
Phone
9146930600
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Family Services for Adolescent Parents

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,523,171
Expenses
$3,168,696
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Andrew Wozniak (President)
  • Kathryn O'Neal Dunham (Vice President)
  • Carlton Mitchell (Interim Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Carlton Mitchell (Interim Executive Director): $149,086 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Inwood house is dedicated to helping teens become healthy, selfreliant adults. We help teens take charge of their lives by (1) facilitating the development of the knowledge, skills, and self-esteem needed to set life goals, make responsible decisions, and avoid teenage pregnancy; (2) providing a continuum of care for pregnant and parenting teens in foster care that builds on their strengths and moves them toward self-sufficiency; and (3) being a source of hope, guidance, and opportunity.

What it reported doing in 2016

Teen choice - a proven, school-based, mental health model of comprehensive sexuality education and pregnancy and HIV/AIDS prevention. The program serves students in public middle and high schools in high need communities in New York city. Through classroom presentations, intensive ongoing small group counseling, individual counseling and referrals, parent outreach, and youth leadership activities, teen choice masters-level social workers help students clarify their values and develop their decision-making skills and self-esteem. Furthermore, teen choice works with teens and their parents to improve communication about sex, relationships, and other issues which affect their health, school performance, and emotional development. Teen choice has been honored with the outstanding achievement award by the national organization of adolescent pregnancy, parenting and prevention and chosen as a model program by the child welfare league of america and the national research council. In 1995, teen choice earned a national demonstration grant from the us department of health and human services. For the six months ended december 31, 2016, inwood house served a total of 929 clients in this program.

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

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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 8
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 81.1%; rating input score 81
  • 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -25.6%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.7%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -32% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -9% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -19.2% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 81.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $149K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2009 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.