Free Enterprise Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
550911428
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2014
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2014, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Selinsgrove, PA, USA
Phone
5707137765
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Student Services, Organizations of Students

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$128,627
Expenses
$93,283
Assets
$128,273
Liabilities
$5,330

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NATHAN K PARKER JR (President)
  • SAMUEL S ZACHARIAS (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • NATHAN K PARKER JR (President)
  • SAMUEL S ZACHARIAS (Vice President)
  • MICHAEL CROSSEY (Director)

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 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To ensure that every young person in Pennsylvania, with a particular focus on students from low and moderate income families, will understand essential economic and financial literacy concepts; benefits by using economic ways of thinking and problem solving skills, and has a continuous understanding of the nature and structure of the global economy in relationship to individual freedom and liberty.

What it reported doing in 2014

The orgranization awards scholarships to Pennsylvania k-12 students from low to moderate income families in accordance with the commonwealth of Pennsylvania's educational improvement tax credit and opportunity scholarship tax credit programs.

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
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and liabilities are high compared with assets.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.3%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 72.1%; rating input score 72

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 27.5%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.38; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.2% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 25.1% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 41.4% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.3% of revenue deployed · 72.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $67K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2011 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 44/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.