America Scores St Louis
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 421666244
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2013
- Forms available
- Form 990 2013, Form 990-EZ 2009
- Location
- St Louis, MO, USA
- Phone
- 2128689510
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Youth Development Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $194,009
- Expenses
- $249,658
- Assets
- $1,279
- Liabilities
- $50,858
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOHNATHAN SUGGS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- JOHNATHAN SUGGS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $37,500 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
America scores inspires urban youth to lead healthy lives, be engaged students, and have the confidence and character to make a difference in the world.
What it reported doing in 2013
Nutrition education and writing: students participate in nutrition education games and activities each day before their soccer and writing sessions to reinforce the healthy living taught through the afterschool program. Students learn about serving sizes and portions, the importance of increasing their intake of fruits and vegetables, and proper hydration. After nutrition education sessions, students participate in writing workshops that reinforce literacy skills by introducing students to the powerful role that language plays in both self-expressions and community service. On alternating days from soccer practice, scores teams meet with their writing coaches to explore poetry, where their own voices become the context for learning grammar, vocabulary and spoken word performance (poetry slams!). During the second season, the teams use writing to map the diverse resources in their communities and to develop and carry out service projects such as community gardens to promote positive change. Throughout the year, student work is published nationally in kicker! And locally in scores newsletters.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 81
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 8
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 96.1%; rating input score 96
- Program expense ratio: 74.7%; rating input score 75
- Fundraising efficiency: $4.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 18th 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: 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: -28.7%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.01; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 39.76; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 15%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: -6.4% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -24.9% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 96.1% of revenue deployed · 74.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $187K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $38K · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2010 to 2013
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 20/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.