Randolph County Family Crisis Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
561240921
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Asheboro, NC, USA
Phone
3366294159
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Family Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,890,332
Expenses
$1,732,744
Assets
$1,028,032
Liabilities
$264,999

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Brooke Trogdon (Vice- Chair)
  • Missy Townsend (Secretary)
  • Sheila Williams (Member)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of the Randolph County Family Crisis Center, Inc. is to serve people who have been affected by abuse. In addition, the organization works to eliminate abuse in the community it serves.

What it reported doing in 2024

We increased the number of sexual assult clients served. The average number of services per client was 5, and we doubled our goal for the number of clients who attended our support group. In terms of services for clients affected by domestic violence, we increased the number of children that we serve. The number of clients participating in parenting classes increased. The number of clients participating in counseling services increased, and the number of clients participating in support groups increased. We also increased the number of services each client recieves to 5 this year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 81% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 96
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.4%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 86.6%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $28.5 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 8.3%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.59; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.4% of revenue deployed · 86.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 32 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.