East Harris County Empowerment Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270377576
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Houston, TX, USA
Phone
2817122550
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,979,084
Expenses
$1,814,894
Assets
$1,267,372
Liabilities
$207,093

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TERENCE NARCISSE (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • TERENCE NARCISSE (CEO): $142,363 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTINA ALLEY (CHIEF PEOPLE AND ADMIN OFFICER): $109,604 total reported compensation
  • MAX MEISTER (CONTROLLER): $104,432 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Ehcec exists to improve quality of life through innovative, susutainable programs and services that empower men, women and youth to achieve their full potential.

What it reported doing in 2024

Leadership & development: during 2024, total served 3000 residents - we believe that community transformation starts with the people who live there. Ehcecs leadership & development programs equip everyday residents, parents, entrepreneurs, and young advocates with the tools to lead change where they live, work, and play. Through leadership training, civic engagement, and collaborative projects, participatants strengthen their ability to build trust, influence outcomes, and shape a more connected and empowered east harris county

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 96% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 72% for direct work, and 28% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.8%; rating input score 64
  • Program expense ratio: 69.6%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.46 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.3%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.7; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.6%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 33.4% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.8% of revenue deployed · 69.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $142K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 58/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.