The Drake House Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 200943038
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Roswell, GA, USA
- Phone
- 4705190432
- Rating
- 88
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Homeless Shelters
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,199,915
- Expenses
- $2,898,656
- Assets
- $6,686,650
- Liabilities
- $587,985
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Nesha Mason (President)
Highest reported compensation
- Nesha Mason (President): $139,507 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To empower women and their children experiencing homelessness to achieve economic independence and long-term stability.
What it reported doing in 2024
The Drake House, Inc. is a crisis residential assessment center for homeless women and children in north Fulton County, Georgia. It provides immediate residential housing, combined with an empowerment program designed to provide stability for the children and assist the family in working toward housing self-sufficiency. The Drake House, Inc. addresses the long-standing need for emergency housing for women and children in the north Fulton community. It offers residential housing and in-depth assessments to families. The target population is single mothers with minor children. These mothers may be unemployed or underemployed and lack sufficient income to meet all expenses of life in the north Fulton community. Women and children entering The Drake House are offered a variety of support services to empower, educate, and move them towards self-sufficiency. Residents participate in a goal setting process and empowerment plan. Initial goals include addressing medical needs of the mother and the children, and the educational needs of the children. Onsite life skills classes are conducted every week on topics such as job readiness, personal finances, parenting skills, and health and wellness. An advocacy program provides encouragement, motivation, and support during the family's stay. The goal of The Drake House, Inc. is to create an environment that allows homeless families to be included in north Fulton community life, enjoy a stabilized, improved quality of life, make increasingly responsible choices, exert greater control over their life competencies, develop and exercise their competencies and talents, and experience personal security and self-respect.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 85% 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 76
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 62
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 76.2%; rating input score 76
- Program expense ratio: 82%; rating input score 82
- Fundraising efficiency: $17.67 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 56; 56th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- 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: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 9.4%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.31; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.8%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 76.2% of revenue deployed · 82% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $140K · 20 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $168K reported
- Consistency: 39 of 39 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 56/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 55/100.