Fellowship Credit Union
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 741147936
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2018
- Forms available
- Form 990 2018
- Location
- San Antonio, TX, USA
- Phone
- 2105994488
- Rating
- 36
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Credit Unions
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $773,113
- Expenses
- $2,711,643
- Assets
- $17,780,948
- Liabilities
- $15,105,293
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- PAM JONES (TREASURER/PR): $159,166 total reported compensation
- WILLIAM V HARTMAN (CHAIRMAN): $5,550 total reported compensation
- RAYMOND SCZEPANIK (VICE CHAIRMA): $5,550 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Credit union is a voluntary, cooperative, non-profit savings institution, incorporated under the provisions of the Texas credit union act for the purpose of encouraging thrift among its members, providing credit at a fair and reasonable rate of interest and providing an opportunity to improve their economic condition. The credit union offers products and services in three primary areas: share accounts, checking accounts, and loans.
What it reported doing in 2018
Credit union offers its members a variety of checking accounts, from free accounts to those with enhanced benefits, such as monthly dividends. Additionally, the credit union extends the reach of these accounts by offering free emv chip cards (all debit cards were switched to emv chip cards in 2016) as well as internet account access and free bill payment services. The credit union had 636 member checking accounts as of december 31, 2018 and also manages an overdraft privilege program to benefit its members. A visa credit card program is also maintined, with 275 approved accounts as of december 31, 2018.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 80% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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 and most voting board members are independent. 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: 60
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 33
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Limited
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -250.7%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.56; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.85; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.6%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $159K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 11 of 12 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2018
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.