Northern Plains Children's Advocacy Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264549220
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Minot, ND, USA
Phone
7018520836
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Child Abuse, Prevention

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,570,683
Expenses
$1,433,369
Assets
$70,818
Liabilities
$160,401

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MAJOR LARRY HUBBARD (PRESIDENT)
  • KATE MURPHY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CHRISTAL HALSETH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRISTAL HALSETH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $126,552 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of npcac is to provide a child friendly, child centered facility, which involves the collaboration and cooperation of several professionals working together as a team to address crimes against children.

What it reported doing in 2025

The purpose of npcac is to provide a child friendly, child centered facility, which involves the collaboration and cooperation of several professionals working together as a team to address crimes against children. The collaborative team is comprised of dedicated professionals from medical, law enforcement, child protective services, mental health, victim advocacy, and prosecution; referred to as a multi-disciplinary team (mdt's). The mdt's work together to conduct forensic interviews, forensic medical exams, investigation, treatment, management, and prosecution of child abuse cases.

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.

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: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 68%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.86 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.7%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.05; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.26; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.8%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.9% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62% of revenue deployed · 68% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $975K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $127K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.