Central Holmes Foundation for Excellence

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463457960
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2013, Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Lexington, MS, USA
Phone
6628342488
Rating
49
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$23,636
Expenses
$38,756
Assets
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Nancy Barrett (President)
  • Katherine Riley (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Nancy Barrett (President)
  • Otho H Hooker (Director)
  • Jane Smith (Treasurer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To obtain financial support from private sources and to build relationships between Central Holmes Christian School, its donors, and prospective donors in order to encourage and promote excellence for the students in every dimension of their education.

What it reported doing in 2018

To provide financial support to, and to build relationships between Central Holmes Christian School, its donors, and prospective donors in order to encourage and promote excellence for the students in every dimension of their education.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 16
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 12
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 18.5%; rating input score 19
  • Program expense ratio: 11.3%; rating input score 11

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -64%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -44.4% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -38.3% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -40.3% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 18.5% of revenue deployed · 11.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 6 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2014 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 19/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 11/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.