Atlanta Montego Bay Sister Cities Committee

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
465716639
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Union City, GA, USA
Phone
7709647736
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health Support Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$203,579
Expenses
$233,456
Assets
$149,736
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

People named in this filing

  • MARJORIE WILSON (TRUSTEE)
  • MICHAEL INGRAM (TRUSTEE)
  • HAZEL MARTIN (TRUSTEE)

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

Furthering and coordinating the reports of atl & mo-bay sister cities relationships health & human svces educational programs technology transfer cultural awareness

What it reported doing in 2024

We have been able to carry out a range of vital initiatives that have made a significant difference in montego bay and atlanta communities. Medications and medical supplies: in october, we returned to montego bay for the annual vin martin health mission. Our team consisted of 52 physicians, dentists, mid level providers, nurses and ancillary staff. Over a 3-day period, there were 977 patient encounters, ages 3 months to 93-years-old. We were able to provide medications and medical supplies valued at $123,000 to ensure that those in need receive proper healthcare and treatment. 1. Local health clinics: a donation of $25,000 in medication and supplies to local health clinics has enhanced the medical services available to the community, improving overall health outcomes. 2. Christmas holiday meals and gifts: thanks to your generosity, we provided christmas holiday meals and gifts to the care center, the infirmary (for the aged and marginalized), the night shelter(homeless), the womens center (single mothers), and the psychiatric unit at cornwall regional hospital, bringing warmth and joy to those less fortunate during the holiday season. 3. Scholarships: $23,000 in scholarships was provided to high school and medical school students to pursue their education, offering them a brighter future and the opportunity to give back to their communities. 4. Local atlanta charities: we extended your generosity to support vital organizations like clarkson community health center (a free clinic offering comprehensive healthcare to the uninsured), helping hands(providing holiday meals and gifts to at risk youth), and nicholas house(a homeless shelter for families), making a positive impact on the lives of many within our own community.

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 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 94.9%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 5th 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: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -14.7%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.64; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.9% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 94.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $222K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.