New Transitions Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
275096591
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2014, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Madison, TN, USA
Phone
6155847549
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Temporary Housing

Reported finances

Expenses
$89,322
Assets
$89,976
Liabilities
$89,322

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • John Slate (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Roger Conner (Chairman)
  • John Slate (Executive Director)
  • Ken King (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide safe & affordable housing to homeless youth transitioning from foster care to adulthood.

What it reported doing in 2015

To provide a safe night to homeless youth aging out of foster care: We provided 3,844 safe nights - not sleeping in car, church surfing, or staying with family to 24 young men and women. To teach life skills to youth aging out of foster care such as cooking, financial management, computer skills, anger management (2 evenings per week). A GED course, and tutor was made available for those not completing their high school school requirements - 7 people attended classes and 5 completed their GED. To teach financial management, job readiness, obtain & retain employment, to obtain drivers license & purchase vehicles in transitional plan review weekly. Every participant was involved in developing their own transitional plan.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 14
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: Limited
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.01; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.99; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 53.7%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 26.7% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 43.3% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 4 of 4 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2012 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.