Fc Mission Plaza Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
834321982
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
5124472026
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$450,261
Expenses
$1,121,983
Assets
$16,981,007
Liabilities
$16,301,484

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WALTER MOREAU (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • WALTER MOREAU (PRESIDENT): $405,159 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Support the charitable purposes of foundation communities, inc. And shall constitute a qalicb, as defined in section 45d of irc.

What it reported doing in 2025

Acquiring, rehabilitating, maintaining, and leasing the buildings located in austin, Texas, known as mission plaza to qualify as a qalicb under the new markets tax credit program. Mission plaza facilities will provide space for the operations of foundation communities, inc. And other non-profit agencies providing services to economically disadvantaged individuals. The fc prosper center will deliver free income tax return preparation, health insurance enrollment assistance and financial literacy programs to low-income residents of the community. The office space for the administrative operations of foundation communities, inc. Helps further the organization's ability to develop affordable housing with supportive social services to educate, support and improve the financial standing of the working poor in our communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 92% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 54% for direct work, and 46% for affiliated organizations.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97.5%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -149.2%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 15.13; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.96; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26.5% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -27.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $405K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.