Honey Shine Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
273545698
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Miami, FL, USA
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Academic Exchange

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$336,711
Expenses
$220,980
Assets
$600,853
Liabilities
$46,421

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

32 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TINA BROWN (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • TINA BROWN (CEO): $210,956 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To encourage the balance of mind, body and soul in girls and women by providing nurturingexperiences that enlighten their paths and empower their future.

What it reported doing in 2024

Honey shine, inc. Provides uniform t-shirts, healthy meals (breakfast and lunch), transportation and a variety of supplies to facilitate hands-on learning for 250 female mentees to attend workshops twice a month. The workshops further honey shine's vision to "empower girls to shine as women," by teaching them life skills designed to boost their self-esteem and expand their world view. Each workshop covers a variety of topics including: social and behavioral etiquette, health and wellness, cultural arts, career exploration, college preparation, communication skills, bullying, financial literacy and other topics that prepare them for leadership roles in their schools and communities. Workshops are held at a variety of locations throughout south Florida to encourage confidence in any setting. The mentees are affectionately referred to as "honey bugs," representing various ethnicities, including african american (80%), hispanic (19%), and caucasian (1%), from the areas of miami-dade county where primarily the median income range for most single family households is $30,000 - $35,000 annually.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 79% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 89.9%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 93.9%; rating input score 94; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 34.4%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.72; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.9% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59% of revenue deployed · 89.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 31 of 33 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $199K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $211K · 32 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 44/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.