Hands on Deck Incorporated
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 812891726
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2017–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2023, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- Green Bay, WI, USA
- Phone
- 9205441915
- Rating
- 96
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Youth Development Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $155,543
- Expenses
- $166,073
- Assets
- $94,737
- Liabilities
- $3,999
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MARK HAWKINS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- NATE MILLSAP (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- MARK HAWKINS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- HEATHER COX (DIRECTOR)
- MARK NORFLEET (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Hands on deck is a 501(c)(3) youth mentoring and education non-profit organization formed in 2016 that uses woodworking, wooden boat building, and boating to promote creativity, community and craftsmanship.
What it reported doing in 2024
Hands on deck is a nonprofit organization empowering youth and families to succeed together through experiential learning focused on the science and art of building wooden boats and the preservation of traditional skills.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 100
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 26
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -6.8%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.57; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 30.6%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 37.5% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 28.2% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 31.5% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $166K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2017 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.