Cloverleaf Volunteer Fire Dept

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
760190851
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Houston, TX, USA
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fire Prevention

Reported finances

Revenue
$659,258
Expenses
$1,199,323
Assets
$2,572,858
Liabilities
$821,503

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

People named in this filing

  • LARRY LESTER (DIRECTOR)
  • RUBEN LOPEZ SR (DIRECTOR)
  • JOE STAKES (DIRECTOR)

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 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide fire suppression and prevention services for a community of businesses and residents.

What it reported doing in 2014

Provide fire suppression and prevention services for community of businesses and residents.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% 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

STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -81.9%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.15; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.32; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -69.8% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.2% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.8% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2014
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.