Fire Memories Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330803843
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2016
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Beaumont, CA, USA
Phone
9512609434
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Primary, Elementary Schools

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,284
Expenses
$6,066
Assets
$92,971
Liabilities
$1,721

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Dougles W Hammer (President & CEO)
  • Monte R Hammer (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Dougles W Hammer (President & CEO)
  • Monte R Hammer (Vice President)
  • Richard Rennick (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Display and operate fire trucks at public events, parades and elementary schools.

What it reported doing in 2016

(1) Operated and/or displayed fire trucks for local fairs and parades; exhibitions at local elementary schools; and, car shows. (2) Presentations to several civic groups and historical society. (3) Web page to present history of fire memories; photos of fire apparatus; and, provide links to national fire museums, organizations and associations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 43
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 39.7%; rating input score 40
  • Program expense ratio: 47.7%; rating input score 48

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 16.7%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 15.33; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -14.3% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 39.7% of revenue deployed · 47.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2016
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.