Windward Behavioral Care Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
591849438
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Daytona Beach, FL, USA
Phone
3862585050
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alcohol, Drug Abuse, Treatment Only

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$81,325
Expenses
$431,229
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARK BESEN- RESIGNED 215 (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • DONNA DOOLEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DONNA DOOLEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $120,646 total reported compensation
  • TOM MATTHEWS (FINANCE DIRECTOR): $49,235 total reported compensation
  • MARK BESEN- RESIGNED 215 (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $33,087 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of winward behavioral care is to provide successful treatment and advocacy for adults with substance abuse and mental health disorders.

What it reported doing in 2015

Substance abuse & mental health treatement: carf accredited winward behavioral care provides therapeutic residential treatment for males and females at four locations throughout volusia county. Assessment, outpatient and coummunity based intensive case management services are also provided. Transitional and permanent housing: carf accredited winward behavioral care provides safe and affordable housing in partnership with local governments.veterans services: in partnership with the veterans administration, carf accredited winward behavioral care provides therapeutic treatment and transitional housing for veterans with histories of post traumatic stress disorder, substance abuse or emotional disorders.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 96% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 28
  • Sustainability: 5
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 91.4%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: Limited
  • 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -430.3%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 47.1%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -88.6% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -16.7% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -17.2% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 91.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $394K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $121K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2009 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

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

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • 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.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.