The Child Advocacy Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
431729078
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Springfield, MO, USA
Phone
4178312327
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Child Abuse, Prevention

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,572,961
Expenses
$3,199,386
Assets
$6,814,422
Liabilities
$665,216

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATIINA DULL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • CHRIS KLEINFELD (PRESIDENT)
  • KELLY DUDLEY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • EMILY KEMBELL (EX OFFICIO/ PAST PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KATIINA DULL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $129,469 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to support child abuse investigations, provide access to critical services, and raise community awareness to prevent and reduce child abuse and neglect in southern Missouri. See conintuation on schedule o.we envision a community where justice is accessible, prevention is possible, families are resilient, and children can heal.

What it reported doing in 2024

The current programs provided include advocacy, forensic interviews, medical exams, training, mental health access, and multi-disciplinary team (mdt) coordination. Services are done while implementing a multidisciplinary approach among all agencies involved in the investigation. During 2024:1,657 children were served, 1,523 forensic interviews were conducted, 1,324 medical exams were performed. See schedule o for additional information on the services provided by the center.unique to the child advocacy center is java, a specially trained comfort dog who sits with children during their forensic interview and in some cases their medical exam. The child and family advocates follow the case from beginning to end and provide ongoing support to the non-offending caregiver to ensure that the child is, in turn, supported. This includes coordinating support services to meet immediate and ongoing needs. Case updates are regularly given by the child advocates to keep the guardian informed.the forensic interview is conducted one-on-one by a professionally trained interviewer while representatives from the investigative team observe and listen through closed circuit video systems. The forensic interviewer follows a developmentally appropriate protocol that utilizes research and practice-informed techniques to gather details about an event the child may have experienced or witnessed. Medical services available include child at risk exams (care), sexualassault forensic exams (safe), and healthy child and youth screenings. The medical exams are noninvasive, conducted in a child-friendly manner, and the child-victims are never forced to complete an exam. The highly trained staff of nurse practitioners and medical assistants work tirelessly to create a comfortable environment that does not feel threatening or intimidating. The medical examination is important not just for what it may provide to the investigation, but because being told "you are ok. You are not broken." by a medical professional can be a pivotal moment in the child victim's healing journey. The child advocacy center provides training and education for professionals, community members and front-line providers on preventing, recognizing, responding to, and reporting child abuse. The wide array of training programs available include stewards of children, mandated reporter, child safety matters, and teen safety matters. Additionally, the child advocacy center provides mdt specific training including new mdt member training, first contact: minimal facts training, and building initial child interviewing skills. Through a partnership with the victim center, a local non-profit organization, the child advocacy center connects child victims to trauma- focused therapy to support their healing process. Services are provided at no cost and are also available to non-offending caregivers and family members. The collaborative and effective working relationship among mdt members is central to ensuring the response to child abuse is prompt to reduce severity and coordinated to ensure on-going support for victims. The mdt coordinators schedule and manage monthly mdt meetings, convene case specific mdt reviews as needed, and help maintain an effective flow of communication and information among all mdt partners.

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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and liabilities are high compared with assets.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.2%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 79.5%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.67 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 33; 33rd 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: 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: 10.5%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.13; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.2% of revenue deployed · 79.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $129K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 33/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.