Fresnel Shores

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
832917524
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Fairview Park, OH, USA
Phone
4405271070
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Public Foundations
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$13,709
Expenses
$121,698
Assets
$89,925
Liabilities
$3,586

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TIMOTHY E JAKUBISIN (PRESIDENT)
  • MARY ELLEN JAKUBISIN (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • TIMOTHY E JAKUBISIN (PRESIDENT)
  • MARY ELLEN JAKUBISIN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • THOMAS MANION (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. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Support and promote initiatives that support the procreative potential of the human person and nuclear families.

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation advances womens health and the well-being of families by supporting instructors of Fertility Awareness Based Methods FABM and Natural Family Planning NFP methods including Sympto-Thermal Billings Creighton Marquette and other NFP methods that are in conformance with the ERDs of the USCCB. The foundation provides websites and social media to promote available classes and resources. The foundation also provides curriculum training and instructional support to individuals and organizations teaching cycle literacy. Through outreach and community partnerships the program increases access to ethical patient-centered reproductive health resources for women and families primarily in Northeast Ohio.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 97% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 92
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 92.2%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.56 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 7.2%; rating input score 7; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -787.7%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.74; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26.3% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -22% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.4% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 92.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $112K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 41 of 42 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.