Mountain Child Advocacy Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
581828408
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2009
Location
Asheville, NC, USA
Phone
8282139824
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard

Reported finances

Revenue
$909,224
Expenses
$877,703
Assets
$1,014,756
Liabilities
$31,795

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Christine Malloy (Prior Executive Director)
  • Carla Jones (Current Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Carla Jones (Current Executive Director): $87,616 total reported compensation
  • Christine Malloy (Prior Executive Director): $65,807 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 mission of the Mountain Child Advocacy Center is to prevent harm, protect children and heal families through best practice programs and community collaboration.

What it reported doing in 2024

Mountain Child Advocacy Center Programs Descriptions After achieving national accreditation as a Child Advocacy Center in January 2017, Mountain Child Advocacy Center continues to lead the region in quality services for child abuse victims. Child Abuse Prevention Education: The Mountain CAC child abuse prevention education program is an evidence-based, trauma-informed approach that aims to help kids understand boundaries, identify a safety network of adults, understand what abuse is and know that it is never the childs fault. Mountain CAC Prevention Educators present personal safety lessons to approximately 5,000 K-5th students every year. Mountain CACs Community Educator presented evidence-based training to over 200 adults in the community. Darkness to Lights Stewards of Children and Recognizing and Reporting Abuse are curriculums that teach adults how to recognize and appropriately respond to child abuse victims. The adult prevention education program offers additional supports for parents and caregivers; Circles of Security Parenting (COSP), Resource Parenting Curriculum (RPC), and Non-Offending Parent (NOP) support groups. Circles of Security Parenting (COSP) is designed to improve parent-child attachment and is our primary approach when working with adults around parenting. We have found that as attachment improves, behaviors also improve. Circles of Security Parenting teaches the parent to recognize the need their child is expressing and to respond to the need in a healthy, supportive manner. Parenting classes are provided for approximately 50 families every year.

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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.5%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 67.3%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.18 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 54; 54th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.5%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.16; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.5%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.5% of revenue deployed · 67.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $591K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $88K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.