Agel Cares Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 260703841
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2014
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2014
- Location
- Pleasant Grove, UT, USA
- Phone
- 8016423850
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $46,738
- Expenses
- $98,272
- Assets
- $180,624
- Liabilities
- $1,828
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
People named in this filing
- Craig Bradley (Director)
- Jeremiah Bradley (Board Member)
- Jeff Higginson (Board Member)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Agel Cares Foundation was formed to further the mission of Agel Enterprises through a non-profit, 501(c)(3) organization. Agel Cares Foundation aims to improve life for people around the world by helping families to thrive, communities to heal, and people to find their way to a better life. The assistance provided through the Agel Cares Foundation goes wherever there is a need. Sometimes that means delivering essential medical or nutritional assistance in an impoverished nation far away. Other times, it is providing life-sustaining skills to someone just down the street. Regardless of the scale of the project, the Agel Cares Foundation allows its contributors to give to the world what the world has given to them.
What it reported doing in 2014
Eagle Condor Foundation is founded on the vision of seeing the prophesies of many indigenous cultures fulfilled, particularly those of the Hopi and Incas. Agel Cares Foundation contributed funds for 2 cement walls and all the supplies to make them. Agel Cares also provided funds for a motorcycle/scooter for the school so that they can transport water to the children each day.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 85% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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.
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 some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 69
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 33
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 85.6%; rating input score 86
- Program expense ratio: 40.7%; rating input score 41
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -110.3%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.84; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -27.5% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -13.3% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 85.6% of revenue deployed · 40.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $40K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2014
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 41/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.