First Mental Retardation Corp

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311075918
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2012
Forms available
Form 990 2012
Location
Dayton, OH, USA
Phone
9372623077
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Developmentally Disabled Centers

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,493,816
Expenses
$1,385,219
Assets
$529,700
Liabilities
$301,222

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide residential and habilitation home and home care services for developmetally disbaled individuals.

What it reported doing in 2012

Provided representative payee services to individual recipients of social security entitlement income who cannot manage these funds who also direct another individual to manage his or her money. The funds are used to pay for the current and foreseeable needs of the beneficiaries.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% 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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 46
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.3%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.38; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.57; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.4%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 16.7% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 5 of 7 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $52K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2010 to 2012
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.