Boys and Girls Club of McAllen Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 741553646
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Mcallen, TX, USA
- Phone
- 9566825791
- Rating
- 70
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,597,307
- Expenses
- $5,001,793
- Assets
- $7,684,133
- Liabilities
- $227,426
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
31 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MARY LAMBERT (PRESIDENT)
- MARK MAGNON (PRESIDENT ELECT)
- HERIBERTO MANRIQUE DE LARA (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
- DALINDA ALCANTAR (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- DALINDA ALCANTAR (CEO): $132,490 total reported compensation
- BILL LYCKMAN (CFO): $90,193 total reported compensation
- JESSICA SOLIZ (COO): $76,796 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To enable all young people especially those who need us most to reach their full potential as productive caring responsible citizens.
What it reported doing in 2024
The Community After-School Enrichment Program is funded by the Development Corporation of McAllen DCM to enhance academic performance attendance behavior promotion and graduation rates of participating children. The program is conducted in collaboration with McAllen ISD at at-risk campuses. Offered services comprise homework assistance youth mentoring and programs promoting healthy habits and physical education.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 64% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up 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: 58
- Transparency & Controls: 73
- Accountability: 86
- Sustainability: 60
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 55.1%; rating input score 55
- Program expense ratio: 61.6%; rating input score 62
- Fundraising efficiency: $23.28 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 77.8%; rating input score 78; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 66.9%; rating input score 67; 18th 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: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 10.6%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.54; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 55.1% of revenue deployed · 61.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 28 of 28 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $132K · 31 people listed
- Consistency: 43 of 49 current checks pass · 6 findings to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX DepreciationDepletion column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherSalariesAndWages column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PayrollTaxes column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 47/100.