Feonix - Mobility Rising
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 824842980
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Lincoln, NE, USA
- Phone
- 8336536544
- Rating
- 89
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Transportation Assistance
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $6,106,601
- Expenses
- $5,966,689
- Assets
- $1,664,412
- Liabilities
- $353,708
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CHARNELLE HICKS (PRESIDENT)
- KARINA RICKS (VICE PRESIDENT)
- VALERIE LEFLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- VALERIE LEFLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $138,468 total reported compensation
- KATE SCHRAMM (DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT): $106,043 total reported compensation
- JEREMY O'HEARN (DIRECTOR OF OPERATION): $105,870 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Mobility solutions for the health and wellbeing of every person in every community.
What it reported doing in 2024
In 2024, feonix supported mobility equity in regions of Texas, Wisconsin, Michigan, South Carolina, and Tennessee. Feonix operated transportation assistance hubs and initiatives to support veterans, perinatal and infant health, older adults, access to care, healthy food, employment and education. In total, feonix provided 40,856 trips and served 5,601 individuals over the course of the year. Feonix also invested significant resources in transitioning programs and operations to support the transportation assistance hub model, and mobility as a service and mobility wallet technology.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 92
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 33
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 91%; rating input score 91
- Program expense ratio: 93.7%; rating input score 94
- Fundraising efficiency: $214.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 97.9%; rating input score 98; 34th 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: 8 of 8 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: 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: 2.3%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.9%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 34.2% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 31.5% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 32.1% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 91% of revenue deployed · 93.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $138K · 15 people listed
- Consistency: 28 of 30 current checks pass · 2 findings 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: 13 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 6 filed related-organization links
- 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.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 48/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.