Ohio Peer Recovery Organizations Ohio-pro
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 844561840
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Columbus, OH, USA
- Phone
- 3307175702
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alcohol, Drug Abuse, Treatment Only
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,464,156
- Expenses
- $2,366,872
- Assets
- $1,858,599
- Liabilities
- $1,252,782
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- MICHAEL KRAUSE (EXECUTIVE DI): $153,250 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Mission: to strengthen and expand the impact of peer recovery organizations throughout Ohio. Vision: ohioans thriving in recovery. Values: impact - we advance peer recovery services because we know, from research and experience, that peer to peer recovery has better outcomes. Expansion - we serve all regions in Ohio and are committed to diverse representation of every community. Lived experience - we advocate for those with mental health and substance use disorders, and we elevate their role in recovery programs. Unified voice - our collective impact as a sector is best realized when we communicate and lead with unity. Hope - we believe in the power of gratitude, optimism, and spirituality to help those in recovery overcome the challenges they face. Connection - our mission is based on relationships -- peer to peer and organizatio to organization -- to ensure those we serve live healthy lives.
What it reported doing in 2024
To serve as a unifying voice for Ohio peer recovery organizations and programs to speak with a unified voice in all aspects of the mental health and substance use disorder systems.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 96% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 49% for direct work, and 51% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 86
- Transparency & Controls: 72
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 37
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 95%; rating input score 95
- Program expense ratio: 98.9%; rating input score 99
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 99.1%; rating input score 99; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 3.9%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.67; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.5%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 52.5% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 49.2% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 45.5% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 95% of revenue deployed · 98.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $153K · 10 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 36 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 35 filed related-organization links
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 44/100.