My Covenant Place

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
113826601
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Upper Marlboro, MD, USA
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Victims' Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,852,905
Expenses
$1,344,944
Assets
$509,646
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LaTisha Carter (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • LaTisha Carter (Executive Director)

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 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

A non-profit in Maryland serving victims of crime and strengthening families through advocacy, counseling, and court-ordered programs like anger management and domestic violence intervention.

What it reported doing in 2023

Help thousands of victims and survivors of crime and provided offender accountability based services. Victim Services and Advocacy- No this service did not generated income Provides crisis intervention, safety planning, emergency hotel placement, and victim advocacy for individuals and families impacted by crime.Goal: Ensure immediate safety and stabilization for victims while connecting them to long-term support.People Served: Over survivors of crime and violence.Results: 80% reported increased information, rights, safety and awareness of resources; referrals made to housing, counseling, legal resources and/or additonal linkage to additional community sercvices. Counseling and Therapeutic Services-No this service did not generated income Delivers trauma-informed individual and group therapy to adults and children impacted by interpersonal violence, including bilingual sessions.Goal: Reduce trauma-related symptoms and promote long-term emotional recovery.People Served: Approximately 100 clients.Results: 70% reported at least a 30% reduction in symptoms. Alpha Project (Diversionary Sentencing & Treatment)- Yes this service generated income Offers court-referred Abuse Intervention and anger management programming focused on accountability and violence prevention.Goal: Reduce recidivism and foster behavioral change through structured education and counseling. People Served: Aprox 100 court referred participants. Legal Assistance and Court Support- No this service did not generated income Brief Description: Offers victims legal information, safety planning, and limited legal assistance, including preparation of protective orders, court accompaniment and advocacy regarding victims rights.Goal/Intended Outcome: Increase victims access to legal protection and improve navigation of the justice system.People Served: Victims of domestic violence seeking civil or criminal legal relief.Results: Participants gained greater confidence in court processes and improved outcomes related to protective orders and personal safety. Community Outreach, Engagement, Education & Training Institute- No this service did not generated income Hosts professional trainings, school presentations, and community events on trauma-informed care, ERPO awareness, and prevention.Goal: Strengthen community response to violence and build professional capacity among service providers.People Served: More than 500.Results: Increased digitial foot traffic andknowledge and confidence using programs and services

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 92% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 65
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.1%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 85.6%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 5th 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: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 27.4%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.38; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 118.4% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 125% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.1% of revenue deployed · 85.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.