The Lord's Place Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
592240502
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
West Palm Beach, FL, USA
Phone
5614940125
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Homeless Shelters

Reported finances

Revenue
$15,626,965
Expenses
$18,922,487
Assets
$35,670,748
Liabilities
$2,593,598

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

Leadership & pay

31 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHRISTINE FREDERICK (CEO (DOH 5/24/25))
  • DIANA STANLEY (FORMER CEO (7/1/24-2/3/25))

Highest reported compensation

  • DIANA STANLEY (FORMER CEO (7/1/24-2/3/25)): $261,533 total reported compensation
  • JESSICA PARRISH (COO): $140,299 total reported compensation
  • CRISTINA A LUCIER (VP OF COMMUNITY PROGRAMS): $124,320 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 lord's place, inc. (the lord's place or agency) is a non-sectarian organization dedicated to breaking the cycle of homelessness for men, women and children in our community. Supportive services offered through our housing programs include case management, recovery support, behavioral health care and coordination, budgeting and financial counseling, as well as services designed to secure and maintain employment, reconnect with family, and participate in community life.

What it reported doing in 2024

Re-entry: the agency's reentry program supported over 200 adults annually as they transition back into the community following incarceration. The program offered comprehensive services, including case management, job training, peer support, healthcare coordination, referrals to community-based mental health and substance use treatment, housing navigation and placement, family reunification assistance, and more. As a result of these efforts, more than 80% of participants avoided re-arrest for at least one year after enrollment, reflecting the program's success in fostering stability and reducing recidivism. Beyond direct services, the reentry program actively participated in reentry coalitions, collaborative initiatives, and advocacy efforts to address systemic criminal justice issues and improve outcomes for individuals affected by incarceration.clinical and care coordination services: the agency's counseling, access, recovery, and education (care) team provided integrated healthcare support and coordination for 130 unhoused individuals who were experiencing acute and/or chronic physical and behavioral health conditions. This multidisciplinary team included a licensed clinical social worker, a board-certified psychiatric nurse practitioner, a recovery coordinator, a certified community health worker, and other key members of clients' support systems, such as housing staff, case managers, job coaches, and benefits navigators. The care team delivered a wide range of services, including care coordination, medical advocacy, psychiatric assessments, treatment planning, medication management, crisis intervention, recovery support, and assistance with preventative and primary healthcare. Staff assisted clients with scheduling and attending healthcare appointments, following treatment plans, monitoring health indicators (e.g., blood pressure, diabetes management, wound care), managing health insurance, and more. As a result of these efforts, 82% of clients avoided or reduced their use of emergency services. Among those who exited the program, 88% were successfully connected to health insurance and a community-based medical home, ensuring continuity of care and long-term health stability.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 66% for direct work, and 34% for grants.
  • 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 91
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 87.9%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -21.1%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.89; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.3%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $16.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $262K · 31 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 48/100.