Womens Crisis Center of Taney County Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
431562094
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Branson, MO, USA
Phone
4175615105
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Services N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$933,832
Expenses
$761,768
Assets
$1,065,715
Liabilities
$16,915

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Becky Vermeire (Executive Director)
  • Robert Huels Jr (President)
  • Dawnell ODay (Vice-President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Becky Vermeire (Executive Director): $76,649 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Crisis Center provides shelter and services to victims and their children of domestic and sexual violence.

What it reported doing in 2025

Provided Crisis intervention, case management, shelter for recipients, counseling and other services as needed by victims of domestic and sexual violence. During 2025 the following services were provided: 427 sheltered, 178 non-residential individuals served, and 85 individuals were provided transitional housing. Provided 308 recipients with 269 crisis intervention hours, provided 16,947 recipients with 11,438.25 case management hours, provided 8,381 emergency shelter bed nights, and 2,296 transitional housing bed nights. Provided 6 training and community programs with 940 persons in attendance. Provided 334 Support Group Sessions with 918 person in attendance.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 70% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

STRONG - 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.1%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 81.9%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1,246.54 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: 18.4%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.4; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.1%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.1% of revenue deployed · 81.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $624K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $77K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.