Never Again Foundation Legal Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
861016849
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Queen Creek, AZ, USA
Phone
6027612535
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$394,373
Expenses
$262,022
Assets
$137,944
Liabilities
$13,198

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Ronald Keith Perkins (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Ronald Keith Perkins (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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Never Again Foundation helps families that have lost a loved one to domestic violence. We provide services that rebuild lives through hope, justice and healing.

What it reported doing in 2016

We represented Several Victims of Domestic Violence to protect and enforce the victims rights in Civil and Probate justice courts. Filing numerous motions and hours of litigation in our client behalf. Winning judgments and enforcing restitution liens. Several of our staff attended several conferences to help further educate other agencies in how to help victims in domestic violence situations, how to avoid further domestic violence and keep them safe. These staff members also had several teaching opportunities to future lawyers in how to maneuver through the justice system to help their clients in the most effective and honorable way!

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 61% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.2%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 98.2%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: 33.6%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.53; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 36.2% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.6% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 90% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65.2% of revenue deployed · 98.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $257K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2014 to 2016
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.