Thrive Central Oregon

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
814581787
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Bend, OR, USA
Phone
5417281022
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,545,418
Expenses
$2,202,182
Assets
$1,168,711
Liabilities
$86,677

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SARAH MAHNKE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • KATHY H SABATIER (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • SARAH MAHNKE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $117,816 total reported compensation
  • MEGAN STICKNEY (OPERATIONS DIRECTOR): $87,699 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 connect individuals to the housing and community resources they seek.

What it reported doing in 2024

Thrive central Oregon (thrive) helps overcome housing and financial insecurity in our community through a holistic approach that connects families and individuals to private and public resources they seek. Individuals and families who are living in poverty and often in needof social services and support. A lack of knowledge of what the community has to offer, transportation and access barriers, and difficulty in navigating systems are primary reasons individuals and familiies are unable to access these community service supports. Thrive bridges the gap for community members, providing phone support, office appointments and drop-ins to connect with individuals where they are in public spaces. Thrive has a community-based advocate to meet one-on-one, to offer assessments and hands-on assistance to link to permanent housing, health care, mental health support, employment, benefits and basic needsassistance. For the year ended 6/30/2025, thrive advocates met with 2508 central oregonians, connecting 179 to stable housing they sought.

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 53% for direct work, and 47% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.1%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 89.1%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $42.49 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 76; 76th 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.5%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.53; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.3%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 22.3% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 20.6% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 24.4% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.1% of revenue deployed · 89.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $118K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • 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.
  • 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: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.