Ascend Cares Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
900709302
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Houston, TX, USA
Phone
7133515700
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,293,720
Expenses
$896,038
Assets
$701,758
Liabilities
$38,187

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RACHELL GOLD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • PHIL MCDIVITT (DIRECTOR)
  • ANDREW RALSTON (DIRECTOR)
  • SCOTTY HALL (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Ascend cares foundation (the "corporation") is organized and shall be operated exclusively for charitable, scientific and educational purposes within the meaning of section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code of 1986 in furtherance of such purposes, the corporation shall provide aid to victims of natural or civil disasters or emergency hardships and support the efforts of relief organizations that provide aid to victims of natural or civil disasters or emergency hardships. Ascend cares coordinates volunteers and provides financial support to 501(c)(3) organizations that support children's health and safety, education, housing, hunger and the military.

What it reported doing in 2024

The ascend cares foundation awards scholarships based on financial need academic performance and community service. Applicants explain their financial need and community service in an essay format; payments are made directly to the school. To be eligiable, applicants must attend a 4 year college or junior college, and must be children or dependents of employees in good standing. In 2024, 93 scholarships were awarded.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 93% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 18
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.3%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 70.6%; rating input score 71; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 30.7%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.78; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.4% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 12 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $896K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 23 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 17 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 18 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.