The Spring Shelter Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 731474319
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2025
- Location
- Sand Springs, OK, USA
- Phone
- 9182454075
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Emergency Assistance
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,528,091
- Expenses
- $4,394,305
- Assets
- $12,566,401
- Liabilities
- $2,221,605
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JARED SAWYER (PRESIDENT)
- KARRIE SHUST (VICE PRESIDENT)
- LESLIE CLINGENPEEL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- LESLIE CLINGENPEEL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $171,957 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Providing advocacy, a safe escape, and ongoing christ-like care for victims of domestic violence, sexual violence, and human sex trafficking.
What it reported doing in 2025
Transitional living: the spring's transitional living program offers survivors of domestic and sexual violence and human trafficking a safe, structured, and supportive environment while they work toward self-sufficiency and rebuild their lives. Designed as the next step in the healing process, our program is tailored to the individual and structured to meet our residents' unique needs for up to 18 months. Transitional living is meant for those survivors who have come out of crisis and are ready to build a brighter future. Residents live independently or with family in self-sustaining cabins, paying gradual monthly fees and pursue employment or education. Our staff offers case management and access to robust community resources like legal aid and job readiness training.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 69
- Transparency & Controls: 62
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 67
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 65.6%; rating input score 66
- Program expense ratio: 81.4%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: $16.16 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 21st 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: 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: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 20.5%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.86; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.9%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 65.6% of revenue deployed · 81.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $172K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.