Friends of Bexar County Child Welfare Board Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742258239
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
San Antonio, TX, USA
Phone
2104908288
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$44,352
Expenses
$97,841
Assets
$110,748
Liabilities
$36,301

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Marcie Trevino Ripper (Chair)
  • Meghan Garza (Vice Chair)
  • Katy Stout (Treasurer)

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 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Mission is to serve as a proactive voice for all abused, neglected, and at risk children in Bexar County, Texas and to augment the services that are delivered to them through advocacy and fundraising

What it reported doing in 2022

Direct Services to Individuals-Providing necessities for those in need in our community. Friends receives requests from CPS Child Protective Services, a State of Texas Program to support its needs for non-funded cases involved individuals. Friends issues paymentfor items based on pre-established and approved categories to assist CPS and these individuals in their time of need. Examples include cribs, strollers, car seats, baby items, blankets, childrens clothing, bus passes, medical suport, and support for emergency removals. Funding in the past was provided by Bexar County Jury donations and in 2022 mostly provided by Naijim Foundation, Texas JAG Grant, and individual donations.

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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 93.2%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $23.1 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 17th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -120.6%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.13; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 93.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $91K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2012 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.