High Plains Resource Conservation & Development Area Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
752421448
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2011, Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Hereford, TX, USA
Phone
8063444007
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$79,451
Expenses
$72,622
Assets
$203,350
Liabilities
$1,131

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BOBBY POOL (President)
  • GWEN BARNHART (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • BOBBY POOL (President)
  • GWEN BARNHART (Vice President)
  • TOM DAVEY (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 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide communities in the High Plains RC&D area with opportunities for solving local natural resource and community needs by providing leadership, information, education and support through a network of partnerships.

What it reported doing in 2013

We act as a community redistribution partner in order to distribute goods to people needing assistance in our area. We distributed pieces of household furniture, such as dining room tables, armoires, dining room chairs, bookcases, bedroom furniture and dressers to the ill, needy and youth during 2012. We also provide 300 personal household items, such as sheet sets, towels, mattress pads and home decor items to local families.

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
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% 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. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.2%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 89.9%; rating input score 90

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.6%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.8; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -20.9% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -63.2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.2% of revenue deployed · 89.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $65K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2012 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.