Wernle Youth & Family Treatment Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
350868957
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Richmond, IN, USA
Phone
7659662506
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$816,829
Expenses
$2,520,098
Assets
$8,997,161
Liabilities
$155,407

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRYAN HAWK (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DARRELL GORDON (CEO (JAN - SEPT))
  • BRANDY BREEN-FORD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DARRELL GORDON (CEO (JAN - SEPT)): $187,815 total reported compensation
  • MARIA J VAIL (DIRECTOR OF SERVICES): $66,731 total reported compensation
  • BRANDY BREEN-FORD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $25,962 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide a continuum of benavioral healthcare for emotionally and behaviorally challenged children and their families.

What it reported doing in 2024

Wernle youth & family treatment center inc provides a continuum of residential behavior healthcare for high risk children referred by Indiana and Ohio county offices of the department of child services and other placing agencies. Services include room and board (food, clothing, shelter) plus therapeutic recreation, education, case management, therapy, and residential treatment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 48.7%; rating input score 49
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.27 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -208.5%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.57; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.1%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 48.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $188K · 14 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.