Kate's House Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
814323129
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2018
Location
Seattle WA, WA, USA
Phone
2067435649
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Half-Way House for Offenders, Ex-Offenders

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$825,896
Expenses
$636,017
Assets
$337,376
Liabilities
$89,593

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Frank Candelario (President and Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Thomera Revais (Director of Community Development): $29,975 total reported compensation
  • Errica Chesterfield (Director and Key Consultant): $25,000 total reported compensation
  • Rick Veersteeg (10): $6,925 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Mission statement: We provide safe, tranquil and secure shared housing in nice neighborhoods for people in recovery from addiction and mental health issues. We are MAT (medically assisted treatment) accredited homes. Our clients are treated with kindness, respect and support to help with ongoing recovery, employment and family reunification. We welcome people from the justice system as well as anyone with a commitment to recovery. Vision: Frank and Sherri envision a world where every person has a safe place to live and recover. We do not believe people are disposable. The "15 minute and your out" rule does not exist in Kate's House. We find solutions for people.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provided free room and board for house managers. Provided weekly meetings to encourage and train house managers on conflict resolution, communication skills and peer support. Housed 250 people over the year, providing room, supplies, utilities, clothing, peer support, transportation, weekly meetings with their counselors. Our house leads provided volunteer support for the following programs: Food support, volunteered for community groups that pack food packages for Thanksgiving and Christmas and packed back packs for underprivileged children.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 86% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 90.9%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 23%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.53; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.3%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 40.7% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 37.9% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 44.4% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70% of revenue deployed · 90.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $578K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $30K · 7 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.