Nobis Works Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
581290439
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
Phone
7704279000
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Vocational Rehabilitation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,482,114
Expenses
$7,998,562
Assets
$19,944,061
Liabilities
$717,635

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVE WARD (PRESIDENT)
  • DAVID SUDDRETH (VICE PRESIDENT/COO)
  • MEGAN DAVIS (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVE WARD (PRESIDENT): $294,160 total reported compensation
  • DAVID SUDDRETH (VICE PRESIDENT/COO): $194,529 total reported compensation
  • MEGAN DAVIS (VICE PRESIDENT): $124,718 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Community rehabilitation and employment for youth and adults with disabilities and other barriers to employment

What it reported doing in 2024

Support and administer the vocational activities of the affiliated company, nobis enterprises, inc. As well as provide rehabilitation services including computer training, job readiness, work adjustment and evaluation, job placement & summer youth employment. Both the rehabilitation and vocational activities serve clients with learning disabilities, physical impairment, emotional and mental retardation and brain injury

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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - Most voting board members are independent and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.4%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 66.4%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 15.6%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.49; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.7%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 23.2% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.6% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 57.4% of revenue deployed · 66.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $294K · 20 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.