Fireside Ministries & Industries Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841724041
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2011
Location
Augusta, GA, USA
Phone
7069511579
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Job Training

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$590,311
Expenses
$319,443
Assets
$302,766
Liabilities
$5,290

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHRIS HITCHCOCK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRIS HITCHCOCK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $160,000 total reported compensation
  • PHIN HITCHCOCK (BOARD CHAIRMAN): $30,000 total reported compensation
  • THOMAS LEE (DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR): $20,800 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide ministry through urban agriculture, the restoration of people and places, coordinating volunteers to support other non-profit organizations, and giving educational skills to children through the suzuki violin program at heritage academy in augusta, ga.

What it reported doing in 2024

A community garden project that contributes to the restoration of individuals and families by offering opportunities to grow nutritious food, learn healthy eating choices, reduce the family food budget, educate and add new life skills, and develop and appreciate the responsibilities and benefits of gardening.

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 - 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 62
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 38%; rating input score 38
  • Program expense ratio: 70.2%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.39 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 45.9%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.95; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 66%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 38% of revenue deployed · 70.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $224K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $160K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 38/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.