Digital Media Education Community Mentoring Program Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
010599147
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Pensacola, FL, USA
Phone
8504573102
Rating
39
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Job Training

Reported finances

Revenue
$13,157
Expenses
$12,501
Assets
$2,078
Liabilities
$1,422

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • John Lovrien (Director Pres)
  • Ian Skelley (Director VP)
  • Andy Waltrip (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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Education mentoring program

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 85% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 23
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 25.1%; rating input score 25
  • Program expense ratio: 26.4%; rating input score 26
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th 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: Limited
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.17; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.68; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 150% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -17% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -23.3% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 25.1% of revenue deployed · 26.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 10 of 11 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 25/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.