Jobs for Montana's Graduates Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
562293696
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2011
Forms available
Form 990 2011
Location
Helena, MT, USA
Phone
4064432413
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$244,801
Expenses
$266,262
Assets
$65,738
Liabilities
$16,351

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To develop and support programs to help young people stay in school

What it reported doing in 2011

Dropout prevention program: matches students with community job opportunities and provides follow-up to facilitate the successful connection between school and work, the military and/or post-secondary education - in 51 schools in Montana and serves approximately 1000 students.

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 filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -8.8%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.8%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -16.1% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $246K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $50K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2010 to 2011
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.