Operation De Novo Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411242053
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
6123555000
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Rehabilitation Services for Offenders

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$829,187
Expenses
$788,343
Assets
$327,194
Liabilities
$31,916

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NIKI LEICHT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • NIKI LEICHT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $84,407 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Operation de novo is providing opportunities for a second chance.

What it reported doing in 2016

In 2016, operation de novo admitted 861 clients into the diversion program. 741 of these clients were referred by the hennepin county attorney's office for a felony property or drug offense. 42 clients came into the program on a pre-charge agreement, meaning that if they successfully completed the program, they would have no resulting charge on their records. 71% of individuals diverted to us successfully completed the program and had their charges dismissed in 2016. The agency disbursed $209,475 in restitution to crime victims in the community. We are very proud of the success of each of our programs and owe that success to the hard work of operation de novo's staff and board of directors.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 82% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.1%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 86.4%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $45.93 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.9%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.42; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.7%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.9% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.1% of revenue deployed · 86.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $681K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $84K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2016
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.