Sparrow's Nest Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
753120984
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Tulsa, OK, USA
Phone
9182987732
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Residential Care & Adult Day Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$268,841
Expenses
$266,851
Assets
$20,153
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALISSA STEMPLE (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALISSA STEMPLE (PRESIDENT): $48,000 total reported compensation
  • CENECA CALVERT (TREASURER): $16,140 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Care for orphaned and abandoned children in former ussr. Our main orphanage is located in latvia and we provide support and training to orphanages and crisis centers in surrounding countries.

What it reported doing in 2025

The work of sparrow's nest continued through august of 2025 with the care and placement of 22 children in residence, 20 crisis families served, and 20 reunited families supported with education, material needs, and counseling. During 2025, we had the help of 32 volunteers working with children and helping with changes and repairs to our facility. In august of 2025, we saw the placement of our last child in residence. After receiving a list of requirements for upgrading our facility, including handicap accesss from the latvian social department, we were put in the position to evaluate the cost of implementing these requirements and the feasability of the work. The first step needed was to stop receiving new children and to find appropriate placement for the residential children. Any proposed work on the building to meet the requirements necessitated that the building be empty and free for the remodeling and additions. At this time, it appears that the changes to our existing facility are cost prohibitive. It is unclear whether the new architectural drawings with required changes can be approved by the regional government. For these reasons, we are now exploring the feasibility of developing our farm property for residential care. There are several advantages to this property, including larger grounds and the ability to include animals and nature as a part of the care and healing process of children in trauma. There are also some challenges in the location that need to be met and overcome. We are in the beginning stages of planning and investigating. The building located in jelgava has been listed for sale. Any funds from the proceeds of this sale will go to improving the facilities at the farm. The first three items that will be addressed are a new fence to ensure safety, a new heating system to operate as a fall back when and if the woodburning system fails, and the repair of the banks of our small lake so that there is no marshy area, only a firm bank where the water can be approached safely and used for activities. We will also continue our outreach to families in crisis, reunited families, and pensioners who need help with life-saving medications and physical help. This is a time of unexpected transition and redefining of sparrow's nest's role in serving orphaned and abandoned children in latvia. 2026 will be a year of decisions and new directions. After 25 years of service in latvia, it is helpful to have a chance to stop, evalaute our position, and adjust to the changing needs of children and families in crisis.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 75% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 53
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.3%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 89%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $132.43 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 0.7%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.08; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.3% of revenue deployed · 89% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 6 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $237K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $48K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.