Women of Alabaster Ministry Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
611726300
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2018
Location
Dillsboro, IN, USA
Phone
5135435656
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Religion Related N.E.C.
Affiliation
Religious (unspecified)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$184,242
Expenses
$161,226
Assets
$573,864
Liabilities
$284

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • SCARLET HUDSON (FOUNDER & PR): $42,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide a pathway to freedom for vulnerable women who are victime of sex- trafficking and drug addiction.

What it reported doing in 2025

Outreach teams connect with women on the streets, in prisons and jails. Through weekly outreaches, woa provides food, toiletries and prayer making an essential connection in building trusted relationships. During 2025, woa teams made 346 connections with ladies "on the streets." the jail and prison ministry provided counseling to 547 women through visits at both hamilton and butler county jails as well as the river city prison in hamilton county. Programs within the prisons and jails include celebrate recovery, exit services (including program placement) and 3-day residence encounter christ events. During 2025, 67 women chose to be baptized. Woa is available on an "on-call" basis providing advocacy and mentoring for victims identified as trafficked children (via the juv. Detention center).

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.5%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 75.2%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.32 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 12.5%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.56; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.1%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -23.8% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.5% of revenue deployed · 75.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $121K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $42K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 45/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.