Maine Coalition to End Domestic Violence

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
010359180
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Augusta, ME, USA
Phone
2074308334
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Family Violence Shelters

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,602,808
Expenses
$12,642,258
Assets
$3,434,351
Liabilities
$3,146,787

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DARYL FORT (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • FRANCINE GARLAND STARK (EXECUTIVE DI): $123,533 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 Maine coalition to end domestic violence (mcedv) mobilizes collaborative community action with and on behalf of a statewide network of domestic violence resource centers to ensure that all people affected by domestic abuse and violence in Maine are restored to safety and that perpetrators are held accountable. Mcedv builds partnerships that promote public policy, education, and systems advocacy to create and encourage a social, political, and economic environment that fosters communities where the diversity, dignity and contributions of all are respected and celebrated, and domestic abuse and violence no longer exist.

What it reported doing in 2024

Program 1 - state domestic violence coalition program we entered into a contract with the Maine department of health and human services to act as the lead agency for the distribution and administration of federal pass-through funds and state of Maine general funds dedicated to domestic violence victim services. Through this contract and our federal state domestic violence formula grants, we provided comprehensive training and technical assistance to member domestic violence resource centers on a multitude of social, legal and economic issues that affect victims of domestic violence, dating violence, stalking and human trafficking. We coordinated public awareness activities and public policy advocacy. We partnered with government agencies, private and non-profit organizations and other stakeholders to effectively coordinate and improve the safety-net of services available to victims and their children. Subgrantees to this contract consisted of the eight (8) domestic violence resource centers in Maine. Through this contract, these subgrantees provided direct services to victims of domestic violence, dating violence, stalking and human trafficking and advocacy/support services to others affected by domestic abuse. Services include operating a 24 hour/day, 7 day/week domestic abuse helpline, emergency shelter, individual advocacy, support groups, court advocacy, school-based education, coordinated community response initiatives and transitional housing services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 98% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 78% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.9%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 97.6%; rating input score 98
  • 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: 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: 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: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.3%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.27; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.92; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.6% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.7% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.9% of revenue deployed · 97.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $12.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $124K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 8 filed related-organization links
  • 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: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.