Nami Frederick County Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
753062467
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Frederick, MD, USA
Phone
2403796186
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Counseling, Support Groups

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,022
Expenses
$7,525
Assets
$23,079
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mark Moser (President)
  • Jennifer Litz (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Mark Moser (President)
  • Jennifer Litz (Vice President)
  • Tracy D (Board 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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to provide information, understanding, education, and support for persons experiencing mental illness and their families. We are an all volunteer organization that provides its services and information materials free of charge, offering hope and advocating reform to improve mental health.

What it reported doing in 2017

Mental health information brochures supplied to hospitals, churches, civic groups, doctor's offices and individual mailings. Brochure title examples are "Mental Illness: An illness like Any Other" and "Understanding Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Recovery". Also includes flyers and information availability on the internet and the distribution of this information. (Accounting Category: Outreach and Marketing)

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 82% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.2%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 77.6%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.2%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.07; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.2% of revenue deployed · 77.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $6K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2012 to 2017
  • 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.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.