Joint Urban Missionary Partners

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
204952109
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2014
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Bronx, NY, USA
Phone
9373137085
Rating
43
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$18,474
Expenses
$26,004
Assets
$465
Liabilities
$5,487

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Harvey Bowman (President)

People named in this filing

  • Harvey Bowman (President)

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 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Joint Urban Missionary Partners or JUMP exists to mobilize, host and equip individuals and groups worldwide for cross cultural holistic Christian Ministry and to facilitate alliances with a network of inner city organizations to meet the needs of the urban and global community.

What it reported doing in 2014

Streetlight Community Program - Working with the youth and adult members of the community to meet holistic needs and improve life in the community. Includes tutoring, mentoring, English as a second language classes, etc Statistical data - roughly 4,900 instances of people served, taught and helped.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 19
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 14
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 20.8%; rating input score 21
  • Program expense ratio: 14.8%; rating input score 15

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -40.8%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.02; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 11.8; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -115.1% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -82.4% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -88.2% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 20.8% of revenue deployed · 14.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $4K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2012 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 21/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.