Twbd Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270248325
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Burlingame, CA, USA
Phone
6504880831
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Temporary Housing

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$376,003
Expenses
$641,382
Assets
$11,167
Liabilities
$69,949

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JAIDA IM (EXECUTIVE DI): $58,226 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Freedom house brings hope, restoration and a new life to survivors of human trafficking by providing transitional housing and long-term aftercare services.

What it reported doing in 2020

In 2010, freedom house opened the monarch shelter, the first "safe house- and long-term aftercare program of its kind in northern California for adult female survivors of human trafficking. Located in san mateo county, the monarch addresses the specific needs of survivors who require transitional housing in a confidential location and core services to heal from the physical wounds and psychological trauma after they have been freed from bondage. By providing survivors of commercial sexual exploitation, forced labor and domestic servitude with mental-health counseling, educational resources and career opportunities, the monarch's case management team strives to break the cycle of poverty by supporting women 18 years and older in their journey (full statement on schedule o)

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 78% for direct work, and 22% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 62
  • Sustainability: 7
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 83.3%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.3%; rating input score 98; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -70.6%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.02; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 6.26; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.1%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0% per year; rating input score 0; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.1% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 83.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $535K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $58K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2012 to 2020
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 24/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.