The Anna's House Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
331203679
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Edmond, OK, USA
Phone
4055092055
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Foster Care
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,652,422
Expenses
$1,657,027
Assets
$6,570,957
Liabilities
$9,540

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TODD MCKINNIS (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KATHERINE L CRAIG (EXECUTIVE DI): $151,804 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Anna's house foundation is a faith-based organization with the mission to provide immediate, stable and loving homes for Oklahoma children in state custody. Ahf desires to offer a future of hope and faith to foster children and foster families by providing housing, support, training, and resources in a christian community setting.

What it reported doing in 2024

Ahf families receive one on one support 24/7 from staff including home visits, telephone conferences and court appearances as needed. The annas house foundation provides monthly support group meetings allowing families to come together and lift each other up in prayer and emotional support. The journey can be difficult for families caring for children who have suffered the trauma of abuse neglect and/or abandonment. The support and understanding of other resource/foster families can help sustain a family through unique challenges and tough times. This type of support enables children to remain in placements (families) and reduce the number of moves a child in foster care can often endure.

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 the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.7%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 75%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 7; 7th 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.3%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.97; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.2%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.7% of revenue deployed · 75% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $152K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.