Pregnancy Center of Monroe County
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 581886026
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Forsyth, GA, USA
- Phone
- 4789943173
- Rating
- 50
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Reproductive Health Care Facilities and Allied Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $97,720
- Expenses
- $96,462
- Assets
- $69,897
- Liabilities
- $571
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
People named in this filing
- LLOYD STRICKLAND (CHAIRMAN)
- MARY ELLEN STRICKLAND (SECRETARY)
- BRANDYN PYE (CHOOSING THE)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The pregnancy center of monroe county's mission is to uphold the sanctity of every human life and to promote the special place of sexuality within marriage and children within strong families.
What it reported doing in 2025
Free clothing and infant care essentials - 40 clients, free parenting classes and educational activities - 201 classes, abstinence classes - over 1,300 students.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 21
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 43
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 21.1%; rating input score 21
- Program expense ratio: 21.4%; rating input score 21
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 1.3%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.72; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 21.1% of revenue deployed · 21.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $21K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 21/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 21/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.