Vine Maple Place

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
912082308
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Maple Valley, WA, USA
Phone
4254322119
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,255,694
Expenses
$8,338,130
Assets
$11,241,681
Liabilities
$2,757,776

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHELLE FRETS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHELLE FRETS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $159,643 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Vine maple places mission is to stop family homelessness in our community by helping single parents and their children build lives of hope, stability, and greater self-sufficiency.

What it reported doing in 2024

Serving South King County, Vine Maple Place aims to end the generational cycle of homelessness for single parents and their children. 92% of families are still housed after one year. Our program targets severely low income single parent families who are homeless, or in imminent danger of losing their housing. This program provides support services including housing stability and rent assistance, financial literacy and budgeting, employment workforce development focused on livable wages, counseling, and child and youth programming to heal and grow academically and socially. In the fiscal year ending 6/30/25 our program provided housing and/or support services to 4,862 people.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 74% for direct work, and 26% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.2%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 81%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.59 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -14.9%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.35; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.9%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19.8% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93.2% of revenue deployed · 81% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $160K · 9 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.