Youth Services for Stephens County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
730981661
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Duncan, OK, USA
Phone
5802558800
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$721,661
Expenses
$951,102
Assets
$1,446,791
Liabilities
$62,851

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN HERDT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • SARA C ORELLANA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN HERDT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $49,339 total reported compensation
  • SARA C ORELLANA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $27,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Providing assistance to juveniles primarily of the sephens county area. That assistance includes the operation of a shelter for youth as well as conseling services for at-risk youth and their parents

What it reported doing in 2016

Provided counseling, suppot and shelter for at-risk youth and their families

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 80% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.3%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 57.9%; rating input score 58
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 78.6%; rating input score 79; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: 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: -31.8%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.52; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -14.3% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -12.4% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.8% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.3% of revenue deployed · 57.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $776K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $49K · 18 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 17 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2012 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 44/100.