D Augustus Straker Bar Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
383304534
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2013
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Southfield, MI, USA
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Reported finances

Revenue
$24,783
Expenses
$9,120
Assets
$29,958

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SHIRLEY A KAIGLER ESQ (President)
  • ADRIAN B SPINKS MAGISTRATE (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • SHIRLEY A KAIGLER ESQ (President)
  • ADRIAN B SPINKS MAGISTRATE (Vice President)
  • STEVE LOVELACE (Secretary/Treas)

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 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide scholarships to students who display academic promise.

What it reported doing in 2013

During 2013 two scholarships in the amount of $2,500 each were provided to qualifying students. The foundation also provided $4,100 to the d. Agustus straker bar association, a 501(c)(6)organization created to promulgate policies and conduct activities for the benefit of individuals and organizations engaged in the practice of law and to provide public service activities that help promote the public service image of attornys within and without the state of Michigan.

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
Transfer-based 990-EZ. The 990-EZ reports grants or member benefits, but it does not separate enough spending to show the nonprofit’s full delivery mix.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 23
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 36.7%; rating input score 37
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

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: 63.2%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.28; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 60.6% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.6% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 36.7% of revenue deployed
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $9K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2010 to 2013
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 37/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.