New Mexico Family Network

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
850386202
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Albuquerque, NM, USA
Phone
5052650430
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Behavioral Science

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$46,313
Expenses
$59,725
Assets
$775
Liabilities
$6,293

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAN FRAMPTON (PRESIDENT)
  • JILL WYATT GONZALES (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • DAN FRAMPTON (PRESIDENT)
  • JILL WYATT GONZALES (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • SERNIA THOMPSON (TREASURER)

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

To support and empower families with children and youth who have neurobiological, emotional, and behavorial needs by advocating for individual families and for transformation of systems and service delivery.

What it reported doing in 2016

Nmfm provides individual advocacy and support to families with a child experiencing behavorial challenges, learning disabilities, mental illness, or neurological differences. Nmfm assists families when children are at risk of long-term suspension, expulsion, out-of-home placement, or other adverse outcomes. Nmfm advocates travel statewide to work directly with families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 95%; rating input score 95
  • 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: -29%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.01; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 8.12; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.1% per year; rating input score 0; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -53.5% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -70% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 95% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $57K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2011 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.