Plateau Pregnancy Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
621517569
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Crossville, TN, USA
Phone
9314566944
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Reproductive Health Care Facilities and Allied Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$339,286
Expenses
$300,525
Assets
$486,337
Liabilities
$5,125

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Sheryl Nichols (Exec Director / VIce Chr): $70,044 total reported compensation
  • Anita Elmore (Office Manager): $53,084 total reported compensation
  • Debra Hensley (Project Hope Director): $18,224 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Aid mothers in prenatal education and prepare them for the care of their newborn children with parenting classes and nutrition education. Material help is provided in the form of diapers, formula, baby clothes and furniture. Services include pregnancy testing, ultrasound, and post-abortion counseling.

What it reported doing in 2024

Organization offers free pregnancy testing, parenting instruction, CPR training, healthy pregnancy education, and labor and delivery classes. Material assistance includes diapers, wipes, formula, baby furniture, bottles, diaper bags, and clothing. Assistance is provided in connection with obtaining other resources available in the community. The Project Hope program facilitates recovery from the hurts of prior abortions, abuse, and past poor choices. The Project Truth program teaches whole health abstinence education.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 55% for direct work, and 45% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61%; rating input score 61
  • Program expense ratio: 68.4%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: $76.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.4%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.62; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 47%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 24.3% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61% of revenue deployed · 68.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $205K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $70K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.