Business Loan Fund of the Palm Beaches Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
593392460
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
West Palm Beach, FL, USA
Phone
5614782337
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$130,950
Expenses
$139,460
Assets
$74,883
Liabilities
$299,356

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LIA T GAINES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • ELVIN DOWLING (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • LIA T GAINES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $36,300 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide technicall assistance , training and other support to small businesses and entrepreneurs located mainly in palm beach county , Florida.

What it reported doing in 2020

During the fiscal year, we were able to provide technical assistance to 540 clients related to their businesses. Our services represent 3,540 units of services (via zoom meeting , group presentation workshops and one on one technical assistance by phone). We were able to help secure more than $2,000,000 in grants and loans during the pandemic. In addition, small businesses were able to create five (5) jobs, and obtain (4) loans .we have conducted six (6) financial training sessions remotely.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 61% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

SUPPORTED - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 60
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.1%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 64.9%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: $19.23 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 16th 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: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -6.5%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.54; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 4; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -24.9% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -18.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -20% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.1% of revenue deployed · 64.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $90K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $36K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2012 to 2020
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 51/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.