Nami of Missouri

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
431398666
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Jefferson City, MO, USA
Phone
5736347727
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Mental Health Disorders

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$556,306
Expenses
$597,951
Assets
$595,310
Liabilities
$93,710

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROBERT PENNELL (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • SARAH BERKE (SECRETARY)
  • DEBORA BIGGS (BOARD MEMBER)
  • BARBARA BUCHANAN (2ND VICE PRE)

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

Nami Missouri works to improve the quality of life for individuals living with mental illness and their families through support, education and advocacy.

What it reported doing in 2024

The samhsa statewide family network (sfn) grant is designed to strengthen a statewide network of family members of individuals with mental health conditions who work to improve access to support and interaction with mental health services across the state. This includes training and support for the holding hope presentation program, family support groups, faithnet presentations, nami smarts and partners in policy advocacy training, as well as efforts to increase family member representation on state and local committees, workgroups and boards that address issues related to mental health concerns.

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.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.4%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 79.3%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 35; 35th 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: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.5%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.4% of revenue deployed · 79.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $474K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.