501Hub Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463155989
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Nashua, NH, USA
Phone
6038824011
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Reported finances

Revenue
$184,208
Expenses
$148,178
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PAUL HEBERT (ceo)

Highest reported compensation

  • PAUL HEBERT (ceo): $51,791 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Helping non-profits focus on what they do best by providing streamlined back-office support. By partnering with 501hub, you will spend less time on administrative functions and more time focused on your mission. Modeled after successful business incubators that have been serving small organizations for decades, 501hub provides an efficient administrative infrastructure and strategic business support for non-profit agencies across New Hampshire. Our work increases efficiency and effectiveness, which allows clients to focus scarce resources on advancing their missions and improving conditions in their communities.

What it reported doing in 2015

We offer expertise in the core back-office functions that pose challenges for many non-profit organizations. By focusing on the following three things, 501hub allows our clients to devote more resources to their missions: Management Expertise Human Resources Facilities and Services

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 74% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.5%; rating input score 61
  • Program expense ratio: 75.3%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 19.6%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 35%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -133.9% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -119.6% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -200% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60.5% of revenue deployed · 75.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $112K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $52K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2014 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.