The Glades Initiative
Legal name: The Glades Initiative Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 010733180
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Belle Glade, FL, US
- Phone
- 561.996.3310
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,618,915
- Expenses
- $2,588,201
- Assets
- $4,333,925
- Liabilities
- $92,324
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Karis Engle (CEO / President)
Highest reported compensation
- Karis Engle (CEO / President): $226,145 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of The Glades Initiative is to improve the coordination and effectiveness of the health and human service delivery system in the Glades area of Palm Beach County.
What it reported doing in 2024
The work of the Glades Initiative targets both service providers and residents of the Glades communities by investigating service delivery barriers to health and human services, developing strategies to overcome those obstacles and implementing effective strategies. Some of our services target providers through increased collaboration and communication, such as culturally appropriate trainings, medical interpreter training, networking meetings for identified needs, the Glades Area Resource Guide, Glades Community Updates, a weekly email communication, web-based community calendar and advocacy, while other services benefit residents directly, through our bilingual Community Resource Educators, who assist residents, with limited English, low literacy, and limited or no access to computers in receiving services. Glades Initiative expects to increase access to services and information, reduce the barriers to health and human services, impact more effective service provision, and increase services to residents, resulting in a healthier more productive community. For more detailed program information see attached Schedule O.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 85% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 93
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 48
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 94.3%; rating input score 94
- Program expense ratio: 94.5%; rating input score 94
- Fundraising efficiency: $79.85 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th 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: 88.7%; rating input score 89; 25th 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: 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: 1.2%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.67; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.7%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 94.3% of revenue deployed · 94.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $226K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 6 filed related-organization links
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.