Wellspring Family Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
910567261
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2068263050
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,993,414
Expenses
$12,285,760
Assets
$14,696,733
Liabilities
$8,375,865

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

Leadership & pay

32 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HEATHER FITZPATRICK STURGILL (CEO UNTIL JULY)
  • PETER SCHULTZ (INTERIM CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • PETER SCHULTZ (INTERIM CEO): $248,512 total reported compensation
  • HEATHER FITZPATRICK STURGILL (CEO UNTIL JULY): $207,450 total reported compensation
  • BEVETTE IRVIS (CHIEF PROGRAM OFFICER): $178,991 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission: to end the cycle of family homelessness. Our vision: a community in which every child has a safe and stable home.

What it reported doing in 2024

Wellspring's housing services specialize in preventing family homelessness before it occurs and intervening early when it does. Our housing specialists provide guidance and support to help families navigate the complex web of community resources to stay housed, find temporary emergency shelter, or secure affordable housing. In 2024, wellspring expanded housing services by launching a new program dedicated to supporting veterans and their families, and by integrating enhanced resident care models within the affordable housing landscape. Our employee stability program (esp) also officially began service, equipping employers with tools to help their employees navigate crises and maintain or regain housing stability. In 2024, wellspring provided prevention and intervention services to 389 families, helping them remain safely housed. These efforts saved an estimated $14.2 million in taxpayer costs associated with homelessness and rehousing. For the fourth consecutive year, 100% of families in our rapid rehousing program remained successfully housed, with no returns to homelessness.

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 75% for direct work, and 25% 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: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.5%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 67.4%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.52 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.4%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.2; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.57; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.8%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.5% of revenue deployed · 67.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $8.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $249K · 32 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.