Vera Lloyd Presbyterian Family Services
Legal name: Vera Lloyd Presbyterian Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 475640404
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Little Rock, AR, United States
- Phone
- (501) 666-8195
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,179,520
- Expenses
- $905,200
- Assets
- $14,036,732
- Liabilities
- $4,099
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DONNA MAHURIN (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- DONNA MAHURIN (CEO): $153,298 total reported compensation
- HAMID AMIN (CFO/CAO - TREASURER): $122,553 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 mission of Vera Lloyd Presbyterian Family Services is to heal, prepare and empower children, youth and families in need. Vera Lloyd of Marianna, Arkansas, contributed financial support for the mission with the stipulation in her will that the home bear her name. Annie B. Wells donated 1,059 acres of timberland near Monticello to provide a location for the campus. More than 100 years later, Vera Lloyd Presbyterian Family Services remains committed to our original mission of caring for youth in need, but has also expanded into providing services for families in crisis as well. Boys and girls from all over Arkansas are served through residential care, emergency shelter, therapeutic group home and respite care. Youth are nurtured, cared for, healed from past trauma and given an opportunity to improve academic, soc.
What it reported doing in 2024
To provide support to vera lloyd presbyterian family services, inc.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Investment-supported. 61% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 99% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 97
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 82
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 91.4%; rating input score 91
- Fundraising efficiency: $796.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: 23.3%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 15.51; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.4%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -19% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 91.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $827K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $153K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.