Trauma Recovery Associates

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463251117
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2020, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Kalamazoo, MI, USA
Phone
9173277291
Rating
37
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,122
Expenses
$173,318
Assets
$51,829
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sue McCrery (President)

People named in this filing

  • Sue McCrery (President)
  • Michael Salbenblatt (Treasurer)
  • Rachel Ogrin (Secretary and Vice Chair)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Trauma Recovery Associates' (TRA) mission is "to offer hope and healing for adult survivors of childhood trauma." TRA provides psychoeducational interventions to individuals and groups injured by childhood abuse and neglect. Additionally, TRA trains mental health professionals and spiritual caregivers in the core concepts of the Trauma Model and its applications.

What it reported doing in 2024

Organization was dissolved during 2024. $100,400 was given to other non-profits and the remaining cash balances will be distributed to the same non profits once this tax return is accepted. This will complete our closure.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1,458.3%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.6%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.6% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2013 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.