Investor Protection Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
421190366
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Muscatine, IA, USA
Phone
5632648080
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Federated Giving Programs
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$-103,128
Expenses
$422,273
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROBERT H SOLT (PRESIDENT/TR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROBERT H SOLT (PRESIDENT/TR): $321,265 total reported compensation
  • RICHARD R PHILLIPS (VP/SECRETARY): $217,115 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTOPHER S INGSTAD (VP): $176,859 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission and primary exempt purpose is to promote social welfare by supporting our organization's specific objectives, which includes support for the traditional christian faith, beliefs, values, and moral standards; protection for other interests of investors, pro-taxpayer and pro-investors action; support and incentives for private savings, including personal retirement, investment, and health savings accounts; and responsible restraints on the size, growth, and powers of all governments.

What it reported doing in 2017

Our program services consist of making grants, contributions and membership dues, payments to nonprofit tax-exempt organizations that advance, aid or support one or more of our specific objectives, including but not limited to those listed above. Our exempt purpose achievement during the year was providing significant financial support to four nonprofit organizations, strengthening and increasing their effective advocacy and public education.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 23
  • Sustainability: 6
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 99.4%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -509.5%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.7%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -87.5% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: -200% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 99.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $420K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $321K · 3 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 12 of 12 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2016 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 7 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.