Magdalene St Louis Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 900855622
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2017
- Forms available
- Form 990 2017, Form 990-N 2012
- Location
- Saint Louis, MO, USA
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Victims' Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $459,239
- Expenses
- $557,885
- Assets
- $920,262
- Liabilities
- $246,958
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CATINA OLEARY (PRESIDENT)
- VERONICA RICHARDSON (VICE PRESIDENT)
- HOPE WELLES JERNAGEN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- HOPE WELLES JERNAGEN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $80,390 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Magdalene st louis is a two year residential program for women who have survived lives of prostitution, violence and addiction. Magdalene is a community where the best evidence based social work is paired with a spirtual community of sisterhood for life giving women a safe place.
What it reported doing in 2017
Magdalene st louis is operating an online retail operation, bravely. An essential part of recovery for women in the magdalene residential program is preparing for employment and developing skills that will empower them to earn a living wage for the rest of their working careers. Through the bravely retail operation, women in the program will develop skills in all aspects of running a business: sales, marketing, web design, order fulfillment, bookkeeping and more.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and the required major-donor schedule is missing or incomplete.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 60
- Transparency & Controls: 76
- Accountability: 79
- Sustainability: 28
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 69.7%; rating input score 70
- Program expense ratio: 57.3%; rating input score 57
- Fundraising efficiency: $4.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -21.5%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.65; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 14.4%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 51.1% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 23.3% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 69.7% of revenue deployed · 57.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $320K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $80K · 15 people listed
- Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2013 to 2017
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 22/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.