The Avery Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472494559
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022, Form 990-EZ 2018, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Greeley, CO, USA
Phone
9707141446
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,260,265
Expenses
$1,188,921
Assets
$167,794
Liabilities
$87,124

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Megan Lundstrom (CEO)
  • Virgina Rosales (President)
  • Raquel DeNaeyer (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Megan Lundstrom (CEO): $90,924 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We are leading the change-makers in our community and across the nation to end commercial sexual exploitation. Our research is used to reduce demand, convict traffickers, and decrease barriers for marginalized populations through evidence based services.

What it reported doing in 2022

Housing Assistance - The goal of Housing Assistance Grants for Victims of Human Trafficking Program is to support housing assistance for victims of all forms of human trafficking throughout the United States, as defined by the Trafficking Victims Protection Act TVPA of 2000, as amended. Funding through this solicitation supports programs that provide 6 to 24 months of transitional housing with support services to victims of human trafficking who are in need of housing as a result of human trafficking.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 67% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 5
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.9%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 84.7%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.7%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.14; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.52; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.6%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 64.1% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 46.1% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 44.4% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.9% of revenue deployed · 84.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 10 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $91K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2020 to 2022
  • 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: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.