Missouri Girls Town Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
440648649
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Kingdom City, MO, USA
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Prison Alternatives

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,803,807
Expenses
$3,709,989
Assets
$16,097,385
Liabilities
$392,605

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

People named in this filing

  • BEVERLY KATZ (MEMBER)
  • DENISE CHAPEL (MEMBER)
  • DOROTHY GETZ (MEMBER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Missouri girls town foundation, inc. Mission is supporting youth and families by providing therapeutic services and education to empower them to reach their full potential.

What it reported doing in 2024

STATISTICS FOR FISCAL YEAR STARTING JULY 1, 2023 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2024: Missouri Girls Town: Provided 7,222 days of careServed a total of 46 clientsProvided 1,365 Individual Therapy SessionsProvided 3,503 Group Therapy Sessions23 New Admission Psych Evals85 Psych Sessions57 Medical (Doctor, ER, Labs, Nurse visits for vaccines, Hospitalizations)30 Specialists Appointments92 Dental Appointments27 Vision Appointments22 Labs5 Physical Therapist AppointmentsMISSOURI GIRLS TOWN STRIVES TO PROVIDE A SAFE AND NURTURING PLACE FOR OURCLIENTS TO LIVE, GROW AND HEAL. BESIDES PROVIDING FOR THEIR BASIC NEEDS, MISSOURI GIRLS TOWN PROVIDES ESSENTIAL SERVICES THAT HELP IMPROVE EACH CLIENT'S OVERALL MENTAL AND PHYSICAL HEALTH.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 63% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.6%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 38.8%; rating input score 39
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.01 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -32.3%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.34; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.6% of revenue deployed · 38.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 18 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.