Employee Relief Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
271872798
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014, Form 990-N 2012
Location
Roswell, GA, USA
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Emergency Assistance

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,312
Expenses
$47,599
Assets
$4,179
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALEX PALEY (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ALEX PALEY (PRESIDENT)
  • GLEN SIDER (SECRETARY)
  • GLEN SIDER (TREASURER)

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 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The employee relief foundation will extend a culture of caring to employees by proving a financial resources to those experiencing unexpected personal hardships.

What it reported doing in 2014

Awarded 1 304.00 distribution to people in need. Awarded 1 320.94 distribution to people in need. Awarded 1 350.00 distribution to people in need. Awarded 1 500.00 distribution to people in need. Awarded 1 750.00 distribution to people in need. Awarded 1 1,000.00 distribution to people in need. Awarded 1 1,200.00 distribution to people in need. Awarded 1 1,250.00 distribution to people in need. Awarded 1 1,300.00 distribution to people in need. Awarded 7 1,500.00 distributions to people in need. Awarded 1 1,790.00 distribution to people in need. Awarded 1 1,870.00 distribution to people in need. Awarded 3 2,000.00 distributions to people in need. Awarded 1 2,500.00 distribution to people in need. Awarded 1 2,800.00 distribution to people in need. Awarded 2 5,000.00 distributions to people in need. For a total of 42,434.94 distributions to people in need.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 89.2%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3,528%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.09; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 23.5% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -33.2% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -20.9% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 89.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $42K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 12 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2011 to 2014
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.