Crossover Community Impact Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
274648052
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Tulsa, OK, USA
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Human Service Organizations
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$975,147
Expenses
$630,942
Assets
$1,368,167
Liabilities
$90,027

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHELLE BARNETT (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • PHILIP ABODE (PRESIDENT)
  • JUSTIN PICAKRD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • SHEILA LOFTIN (BOARD MEMBER)
  • ANGIE WALKER (BOARD MEMBER)
  • REBECCA MARKS-JIMMERSON (BOARD MEMBER)

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 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Crossover community impact is a christian community development organization that seeks to restore its neighborhood in north tulsa through educational and sports programming

What it reported doing in 2022

Internship house program and vibe - restoring our community by immersing young adults in urban ministry, discipleship and intentional christian community.the internship program is focused on three domains for a well-rounded program. The three areas of focus are urban ministry, discipleship, and christian community. The program starts in the fall semester and runs 9 months concurrent with the traditional school year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 - 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: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 41.1%; rating input score 41
  • Program expense ratio: 60.1%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.31 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

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: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: 35.3%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.17; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 31.1% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 41.1% of revenue deployed · 60.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 15 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $379K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2014 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.