Austin Plastic Surgery Foundation Austin Smiles

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742479196
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
5124519300
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,212,481
Expenses
$780,293
Assets
$2,255,295
Liabilities
$4,310

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Rene Hanson Malone (Exec Director): $153,097 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to provide sustainable surgical and post-surgical care to children born with cleft lip and cleft palate both in Central Texas and Latin America.

What it reported doing in 2024

MEDICAL MISSION TRIPSEach year, Austin Smiles completes three medical mission trips in partner countries in Latin America, offering surgical and postsurgical care to children born with cleft lip and/or palate who would otherwise go without treatment. Austin Smiles offers a continuum of care to children born with this condition on annual trips to El Salvador, Guatemala, and Mexico, often treating the same children into adulthood.OUR LOCAL SERVICESIn Central Texas, Austin Smiles closely collaborates with Dell Childrens Medical Centers Craniofacial and Reconstructive Plastic Surgery Center and other non-profit providers, providing social-emotional program support to patients and their families undergoing treatment. Austin Smiles hosts several annual events for these children to be around their peers, so they can share their similar experiences and know they are not alone. Local programming is designed to decrease isolation, build self-confidence, and empower children to love their differences. We aim to foster emotional well-being through fun and community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 47
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.1%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 86.1%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $53.25 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 35.6%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.89; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.6%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.3% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58.1% of revenue deployed · 86.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $672K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $153K · 21 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.