Substance Abuse Relief Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
830536723
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019, Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
New Bedford, MA, USA
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alcohol, Drug Abuse, Prevention Only

Reported finances

Revenue
$152,417
Expenses
$152,068
Assets
$349
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Nathan Costa (President)

People named in this filing

  • Nathan Costa (President)
  • Ashley Cabral (Assistant Clerk)
  • Steven Ricco (Director)

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 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To assist veterans and non-veterans suffering from substance use disorder, and to provide comfort, hope and inclusion during each stage of the recovery process. To provide clothing, transportation, and access to residential rehab facilities.

What it reported doing in 2019

Provided snow removal jobs and other meaningful work to nearly 100 individuals as part of the rehabilitation of veterans and non-veterans from substance abuse. Also in November of 2019, the IRS issued its Determination Letter recognizing the Corporation as tax-exempt under Sec. 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. The tax-exempt status was effective as of May 23, 2018, according to the IRS Determination Letter.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.4%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 95.6%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.2%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: 200% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95.4% of revenue deployed · 95.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $145K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • 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.

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: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.