Mitchell County Long-term Resilience Group
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 332625612
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Bakersville, NC, USA
- Phone
- 8283852122
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Disaster Preparedness and Relief Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,032,383
- Expenses
- $574,774
- Assets
- $457,609
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Stephanie Pitman (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Stephanie Pitman (Executive Director): $12,500 total reported compensation
- Starli McDowell (Treasurer): $6,250 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Mitchell County Long-Term Resilience Group (MCLTRG) focuses on identifying and addressing the unmet needs of individuals and families impacted by Hurricane Helene who lack the resources to recover on their own. Our mission is to ensure that recovery is equitable, coordinated, and responsive to those most at risk of being left behind, particularly low-income households, older adults, people with disabilities, and families with children.
What it reported doing in 2025
Housing Repairs and Replacements- the Mitchell County Long-Term Resilience Group ("MCLTRG") has begun a program to repair and replace housing damaged or destroyed in Mitchell County, North Carolina as a result of Tropical Storm Helene including whole-house rebuilds, roof repairs, water system repairs, sewer system repairs, driveway and culvert repairs, mold remediation, general damage repair and debris removal."
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 83% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 65
- Transparency & Controls: 84
- Accountability: 82
- Sustainability: 69
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 49.4%; rating input score 49
- Program expense ratio: 88.7%; rating input score 89
- Fundraising efficiency: $36.54 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 80.6%; rating input score 81; 39th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 44.3%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.8; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.3%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 49.4% of revenue deployed · 88.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $510K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $12K · 7 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $229K reported
- Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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 49/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.