Restore Womens Wellness Centers

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463345121
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
San Leandro, CA, USA
Phone
5108789709
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Family Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$57,469
Expenses
$414,548
Assets
$189,730
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SHARI PLUNKETT (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • CAROLE FONG (Executive Dir.): $69,560 total reported compensation
  • SHARI PLUNKETT (President & CEO): $51,736 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To address the debilitating effects of depression in low-income women of color. The organization provides professional counseling for women who live at 138% or below of the federal poverty level.

What it reported doing in 2017

To address the debilitating effects of depression in low-income women of color. The organization provides professional counseling for women who live at 138% or below of the federal poverty level. The mission is to help urban women living in high-poverty communities not just survive, but thrive because when women are well, their families and communities follow.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% 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

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 the required major-donor schedule is missing or incomplete.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 68.8%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.96 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 11
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -621.3%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.46; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 29.3%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -33.4% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -86.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -58.7% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 68.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $285K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $70K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2014 to 2017
  • 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.

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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.