Nami - Howard County Md Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 521623565
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023
- Location
- Columbia, MD, USA
- Phone
- 4107729300
- Rating
- 59
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $264,140
- Expenses
- $221,017
- Assets
- $272,555
- Liabilities
- $522
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- LAURIE LISKIN (PRESIDENT)
- JOSELINE CASTANOS (VICE PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- SARA BREIDENSTEIN (DIRECTOR)
- SUSANNE CAVINESS (DIRECTOR)
- ANDREA KALFOGLOU (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of nami howard county, md is to improve the lives of individuals with mental illness and their families through education, advocacy and support, and to increase awareness of mental illness throughout the community.
What it reported doing in 2024
1) annual nami walk for mental health awareness. Namiwalks is the nations largest and most impactful mental health awareness and fund raising iitiative. Contributions to namiwalks directly support our mission to provide free, community-based mental health education programs, peer-led support groups, and advocacy efforts throughout howard county.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 73% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 30
- Transparency & Controls: 83
- Accountability: 82
- Sustainability: 60
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 30.9%; rating input score 31
- Program expense ratio: 33.3%; rating input score 33
- Fundraising efficiency: $2.67 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: 16.3%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.23; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 13.3% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 30.9% of revenue deployed · 33.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $74K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
- Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 31/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 33/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 12/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.