Freeway Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
430731307
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Bridgeton, MO, USA
Phone
3147391121
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$92,645
Expenses
$104,364
Assets
$68,649
Liabilities
$101,003

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CURT SCARBOROUGH (ACTING PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CURT SCARBOROUGH (ACTING PRESIDENT): $8,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Education & drug prevention services

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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.8%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 65.5%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -12.6%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.66; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.47; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.7%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 27.8% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -22.2% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -13.4% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.8% of revenue deployed · 65.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $68K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $8K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2011 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.