Healthcare Volunteer Associates

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
412121149
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2016
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2016, Form 990-N 2011
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
5122630265
Rating
92
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$38,969
Expenses
$68,749
Assets
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Jerry Jones (Director)
  • Judy Jones (Director)
  • Kim Harris (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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We are a dedicated group of individuals from western Travis County that came together to provide healthcare for people who have no access to medical services. Many of the area's working poor must choose between food for their families and medical care. We provided quality healthcare for the uninsured.

What it reported doing in 2016

We provided quality healthcare for the uninsured. Services were provided exclusively by volunteers, including doctors, nurses, medical assistants, office staff, and interpreters.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% 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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 98
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 95.1%; rating input score 95

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: -76.4%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st 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: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -30.8% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -95.9% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 95.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $65K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2014 to 2016
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.