Houston Center for Literacy
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 760151362
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2017
- Forms available
- Form 990 2017
- Location
- Houston, TX, USA
- Phone
- 7132281801
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Adult, Continuing Education
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,118,803
- Expenses
- $2,318,060
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
24 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Sheri Suarez Foreman (Pres/CEO 11/17)
People named in this filing
- Leisa Holland Nelson (Chair)
- Steve Shardonofsky (Vice Chair/Sec)
- Charles Litton (Treasurer)
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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Houston Center for Literacy strengthens providers of adult education who, in turn, provide necessary skills for underemployed citizens to fulfill their potential and become economically self sufficient. HCL envisions a city where every adult is equipped with the basic skills they need to qualify for jobs that will allow them to support their families and thrive as prosperous, independent, successful members of society.
What it reported doing in 2017
The Houston Center for Literacy helps to increase Houston's literacy landscape by promoting economic self-sufficiency. HCL's job is to strengthen literacy provider organizations which in turn offer courses in adult education, English as a Second Language, health literacy, workforce literacy, and financial literacy.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 72% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 76% for direct work, and 24% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the required major-donor schedule is missing or incomplete.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 68
- Transparency & Controls: 77
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 51
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 59.2%; rating input score 59
- Program expense ratio: 79.7%; rating input score 80
- Fundraising efficiency: $45.7 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 95.8%; rating input score 96; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 25.7%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -11.2% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 59.2% of revenue deployed · 79.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 24 people listed
- Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2009 to 2017
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.