Big Spring Rotary

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
756067742
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Big Spring, TX, USA
Rating
43
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$36,733
Expenses
$22,787
Assets
$22,062
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HARDY WILKERSON (PRESIDENT)
  • LAURIE LIGHT (V PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • HARDY WILKERSON (PRESIDENT)
  • JAN FORESYTH (TREASURER)
  • SHIRLEY LEE (SECRETARY)

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 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Benefit youth in community

What it reported doing in 2018

Civic organization projects design to benefit youthin the community

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 10
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 8.7%; rating input score 9
  • Program expense ratio: 14.1%; rating input score 14
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 38%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.97; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -90% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 54.6% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 92.4% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 8.7% of revenue deployed · 14.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 9 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2017 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 9/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.