Arlington Urban Ministries
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 752959884
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Arlington, TX, USA
- Phone
- (817) 861-8585
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Christianity
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,001,976
- Expenses
- $1,103,022
- Assets
- $739,366
- Liabilities
- $7,805
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Jennifer Weber (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Jennifer Weber (Executive Director): $79,755 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Arlington Urban Ministries provides financial assistance for utilities, rent and food for those in crisis in Arlington. Since 2001, our commitment to serving the community has been unwavering. Through financial assistance programs, we’ve worked to prevent eviction and utility disconnection, helping individuals and families maintain their stability and dignity during challenging times. With community support, we can extend our reach and ensure we provide as much support to our neighbors as possible. Our donors play an essential role in this mission, enabling us to expand our programs, provide more resources, and touch more lives. **Donate Now.
What it reported doing in 2024
Arlington Urban Ministries core program is to reduce homelessness and loss of utilities for disadvantaged families by providing financial assistance for rent and utilities. Arlington Urban Ministries (AUM) serves Arlington residents without regard to any differences, such as, race, sex, ethnicity, age, religion and non-religion. AUM serves clients who are homeless, exited from homeless and battered womens shelters, sick, elderly, unemployed and the working poor. This year AUM helped 665 clients avoid utility disconnection or eviction and distributed over 2,715 sack lunches to the local homeless community.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 83% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 51% for direct work, and 49% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 89
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 31
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 87.6%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: $9.97 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: -10.1%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.67; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.2%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $966K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $80K · 17 people listed
- Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.