Good Intentions Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
922843988
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Brentwood, MD, USA
Phone
2023093694
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Services N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$80,300
Expenses
$64,337
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DeJanee Fennell (President)
  • Jeffrey Fennell (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • DeJanee Fennell (President)
  • Jeffrey Fennell (Vice President)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide basic necessities such as food, clothing, and shelter to underserved and disadvantaged communities.The organization provided food distributions, clothing assistance, and outreach services to underserved communities. Programs included community events, resource distribution, and youth support initiatives aimed at addressing food insecurity and basic living needs.

What it reported doing in 2025

Food Distributions, Clothing Distributions, Diaper Program, Backpack and School Supplies Distribution, Temporary Assistance Housing Support, Scholarship Program & Ceremony Cost, and Operational & Administrative Expenses

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 program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 27
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 24.9%; rating input score 25
  • Program expense ratio: 31.1%; rating input score 31

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: 19.9%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 200% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 79.7% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 24.9% of revenue deployed · 31.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $20K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.