Harry Stout Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
202347299
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2016
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Tampa, FL, USA
Phone
5614416459
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Children's, Youth Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,567
Expenses
$8,698
Assets
$12,031

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

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOSEPH STOUT (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JOSEPH STOUT (PRESIDENT)
  • ALEXANDRA KATHLEEN HIRE (TREASURE)

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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The general purpose of harry's foundation shall b to provide scholarships for sutdents who show kindness, compassion, and a genuine desire to help others. Grants taht help provide shcools in a a four county region with musical instrucments for their music programs, donations for shoes for children in economically disadvantaged househoulds and nay other donation and or grant to assist youth in need.

What it reported doing in 2016

The general purpose of harry's foundation shall b to provide scholarshipsfor students who show kindness, compassion and genuine desire to help opthers. Grants that help provide scholls in a four county region with musical instrucments for their music programs, donations for shoes for children in economically disadvantaged households and any other donation and or grant to assist youths in need.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 76% 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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.2%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 24.8%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.38; rating input score 57; 57th 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: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.2% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $9K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.