New Hope Counseling Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
760733573
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Soldotna, AK, USA
Phone
9072607423
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Alcohol, Drug and Substance Abuse, Dependency Prevention and Treatment

Reported finances

Revenue
$463,910
Expenses
$491,647
Assets
$173,741
Liabilities
$3,726

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Debra Hamilton (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Debra Hamilton (Executive Director): $129,018 total reported compensation
  • Keith J Hamilton (Ex Officio): $116,616 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Licensed professional counseling

What it reported doing in 2024

To provide faith-based counseling services to the students of Alaska Christian College (ACC) and to individuals, couple, and families of the Kenai Peninsula. NHCC charges ACC a reduced fee of $40/hr (71% discount) for the ACC students to receive services as part of their tuition package. New Hope Counseling Center (NHCC) also offers a 25% administrative discount to community clients paying out of pocket with licensed clinicians and a 71% discount for those paying out of pocket for a masters level clinician, as well as provides discounted rates to several Employee Assistant Programs. NHCC provided 566 encounters to Alaska Christian College. NHCC provided 422 encounters at a 25% or more discounted rate due to paying out of pocket. NHCC provided 59 discounted encounters through employee assistant programs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 65% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 95
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 69.5%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 26th 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: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.35; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 35%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.2% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 74% of revenue deployed · 69.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $342K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $129K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and related organizations
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.