Knoxville Family Justice Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
300342598
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Knoxville, TN, USA
Phone
8652156868
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Family Violence Shelters

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$734,545
Expenses
$648,342
Assets
$447,339
Liabilities
$27,548

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MIKE HAMMOND (INTERIM PRESIDENT)
  • S MICHELLE CLAYTON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • S MICHELLE CLAYTON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $52,673 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 mission of the family justice center is to facilitate a coordinated and comprehensive approach to family violence through collaboration, education, and advocacy.

What it reported doing in 2024

Form 990, part iii, line 4a, program service accomplishments: navigation is designed to orient clients through the partnership of services for victims of interpersonal violence provided by the family justice center (fjc). Staff members, interns, and volunteers meet clients when they arrive at the fjc and tell them about the partner agencies and how each one works to assist survivors of family violence and victims of crime. Navigation staff briefly review a folder of information ensuring the individual has a safe place to keep the information. The review policies for filing a grievance and carefully review informed consent ensuring the individual knows they do not have to sign it. After reviewing the different agencies, clients are empowered to make an informed decision of what agency they want to work with and when services they want to receive. Navigation staff connects the individual with the agency of their choice. This program uses approximately 3,400 square feet of the space in the fjc.during the fiscal year, 1432 survivors of abuse visited the fjc for services from, among others, law enforcement, civil and criminal legal agencies, social services, and individual advocacy. Survivors were given the opportunity to participate in exit surveys. Through these surveys, a majority of individuals reported an increased sense of safety and security, an increased knowledge of victim services, community resources, civil legal options, and the criminal justice system. The majority of individuals also reported receiving important safety planning resources while at the fjc and reported learning about orders of protection and how to utilize them as part of their safety plan.the navigation program is the cornerstone of the fjc's service to the community and continues to grow to better serve our community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 75% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 37
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 38.3%; rating input score 38
  • Program expense ratio: 43.2%; rating input score 43
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.52 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 11.7%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.69; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.1%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.7% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 38.3% of revenue deployed · 43.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $280K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $53K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 38/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 11/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.