OUR House of Central Vermont Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
030324723
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Barre, VT, USA
Phone
8024768825
Rating
90
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$300,332
Expenses
$281,280
Assets
$345,535
Liabilities
$70,130

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Judy Brassard (President)
  • Ryan Stevenson (Vice President)
  • Rebecca Duranleau (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Rebecca Duranleau (Executive Director): $69,784 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Within OUR House, individuals of any age who have faced sexual abuse or other violent crimes are welcomed into a secure and comforting space. Our team of trauma-informed professionsl ensures a supportive and child-friendly environment where those impacted can openly address their experiences. We offer free access to timely investigations and ongoing advocacy services to assist individuals affected by violence and abuse.

What it reported doing in 2024

During this reporting period, OUR House provided a total of 274 advocacy and support services to individuals and families. Services included 61 crisis counseling contacts, 52 case management services, 51 referrals to additional advocacy resources, and 38 personal advocacy supports. Additional assistance included 27 follow-up contacts, 23 victim compensation claim filings, 7 criminal justice support / advocacy services, and 1 emergency legal advocacy intervention. These numbers reflect the broad range of trauma-informed support provided to clients throughout the reporting period. In addition, 90 forensic interviews were held.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 76% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.

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: 100
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.8%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.3%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.23; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.8%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93.8% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $281K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $70K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.