HEART Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
262727960
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Buffalo, NY, USA
Phone
7168340080
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Heart and Circulatory System Diseases, Disorders

Reported finances

Revenue
$396,385
Expenses
$398,401
Assets
$60,343
Liabilities
$135,635

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Renata Toney (Board Chair)
  • Rashid Wyatt (Treasurer)
  • Amanda Jacobs (Board Member)

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 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Commnunity outreach to prevent and intervene on behalf of court involved youth.

What it reported doing in 2013

HEART offered STEPS Steps To Employment. The goal of the program is to serve young adult ages 18 to 24 offenders and high school dropouts in the City of Buffalo and improve the long-term employment prospects. of at-risk and justice-involved youth living in, or returning to high-crime, high-poverty communities in Buffalo, NY. STEPS provides an opportunity to develop marketable employment skills, earn certifications in recognized certificate programs, and receive practical on the job training. STEPS prepares program participants for success in the labor market by providing comprehensive, individualized case management services linked to workforce development and educational interventions, supports, and training programs. Participants received intensive case management including skill assessments, abilities and aptitude, the development of an individualized service plan, goal setting for educational gains, career planning and identification of barriers preventing youth from advancement. HEART provided services to 161 young adults.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The program-spending lines do not add up, so the filing cannot show reliably whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and assets have declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.7%; rating input score 61
  • Program expense ratio: 60.4%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.5%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.15; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.25; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 64.9% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -20.1% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60.7% of revenue deployed · 60.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $240K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2012 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.