The Healing Place Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
561667721
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Hendersonville, NC, USA
Phone
8286923931
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Rape Victim Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$323,522
Expenses
$307,065
Assets
$469,488
Liabilities
$1,844

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PAMELA HERBST (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROBIN A ALLEY (EXECUTIVE DI): $25,326 total reported compensation
  • TANYA BLACKFORD (INTERIM EXEC): $4,854 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the healing place is to provide specialized services to help men, women and children recover from sexual violence.

What it reported doing in 2014

The healing place provided services to 663 individuals between july 1, 2014 and june 30, 2015. Services included 435 calls on the agency's crisis line and services to 228 individuals in person. Services included the following: information was provided 451 times another agency was called on behalf of the victim 190 times (advocacy) staff provided individuals with 332 referrals to other community resources transportation was provided 4 times in order for a victim to receive services at the agency or return home following services licensed therapists provided 1729 hours of evidence based mental health treatment 9 victims were supported at area hospitals following rape or sexual assault 36 victims were supported through the criminal court process staff followed up with victims and their families 371 times 28 victims were made aware of victim's compensation one victim received emergency financial assistance

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 70% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.1%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 87.5%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $18.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 59; 59th 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: 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.1%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.53; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.8%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.9% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.5% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.1% of revenue deployed · 87.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $269K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $25K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2014
  • 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.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 59/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.