Drive Mississippi

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
455352177
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2013
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Lake, MS, USA
Phone
6019488825
Rating
41
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Improvement, Capacity Building N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$20,000
Expenses
$46,359
Assets
$12,952
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOE MCGEE (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JOE MCGEE (PRESIDENT)
  • JENNIFER SIMMONS (SECRETARY/TREASURER)
  • DAVID GREENE (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Drive Mississippi was created to educate and advocate for the importance of funding and maintaining a safe and efficient transportation system.

What it reported doing in 2013

The activity of the organization is public awarness to educate the citizens of Mississippi and to promote better and safer roads and bridges. The organization promotes through the use of printed materials and the broadcast media, that an adequately funded road and bridge program by the state of Mississippi will result in multiple benefits for the citizens of Mississippi. These benefits include: more safety (even routine improvements make accidents less likely); more savings (a well designed road/bridge system will reduce traffic congestion); and more more growth; (a good road system will be more appealing to potential employers considering moving to the state) for the state and its citizens.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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

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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

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: -131.8%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.