South Park Inn Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 061083735
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Hartford, CT, USA
- Phone
- 8607240071
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Homeless Shelters
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,411,819
- Expenses
- $4,201,751
- Assets
- $4,142,591
- Liabilities
- $382,326
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ANDREW DEPEAU (OUTGOING VICE PRESIDENT)
- JENNIFER HALSTROM (VICE PRESIDENT)
- KEVIN NOBLET (PRESIDENT)
- THERESA NICHOLSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- THERESA NICHOLSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $169,896 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of south park inn is to serve people who are homeless and at risk of homelessness. By offering shelter and personalized support to each of the men, women and children we serve, south park inn, in cooperation with other providers and resources, help people overcome their individual challenges of finding housing solutions appropriate to meet their needs. As their advocate, south park inn ensures these individuals and their real needs are seen and heard in the public arena.
What it reported doing in 2025
The respite program operates a 17-bed facility that provides short-term housing and supportive services for individuals experiencing homelessness who are recovering from illness, injury, behavioral health treatment, or hospitalization. The program offers a safe environment conducive to healing and recovery while providing access to medical follow-up care, case management, housing support, and connections to community-based services. The program serves individuals referred from healthcare providers and hospital partners throughout the region.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 80
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 43
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 83.8%; rating input score 84
- Program expense ratio: 86.7%; rating input score 87
- Fundraising efficiency: $11.57 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 4.8%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.99; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 83.8% of revenue deployed · 86.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $3.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $170K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $162K reported
- Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 41/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.