Malachi House Ii

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
364674390
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Greensboro, NC, USA
Phone
3363750900
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alcohol, Drug and Substance Abuse, Dependency Prevention and Treatment

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$644,330
Expenses
$664,403
Assets
$4,389
Liabilities
$60,379

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES M SPEIGHT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMES M SPEIGHT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $42,235 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The agency's purpose is to provide a nine month residential faith-based mentoring recovery program designed to reach out to men in their recovery process. The primary goal is to assist men with overcoming the problems that lead to addiction and bridge the gap between recovery and the transition back into mainstream society. Our goal is to see men who graduate from the agency become both assets to the community and productive citizens, and to restore them to their families.

What it reported doing in 2025

Provided comprehensive residential recovery support services to participants. Participants receive shelter, food, clothing & sustained recovery curriculum. Some participants' families received gifts from empty stocking fund and toys for tots and other participants' families received gifts from welfare reform liaison. Many participants received a job, leadership training and vocational training in various industries such as welfare reform liaison, guilford county animal shelter, mobile hand car wash, furnture market and honey baked ham.

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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.3%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 69.2%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.63 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.1%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.01; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 13.76; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.4%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.2% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -22.6% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.3% of revenue deployed · 69.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $460K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $42K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 11/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 47/100.