Kristin Mitchell Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
205372277
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2018
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Ellicott City, MD, USA
Phone
4434727010
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$85
Expenses
$53,292
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BILL MITCHELL (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • BILL MITCHELL (PRESIDENT)
  • BOB TETI (BOARD MEMBER)
  • DAVID MITCHELL (BOARD MEMBER)

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 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the kristin mitchell foundation is to support educational efforts that raise awareness amoung young adults about the dangers of unhealthy dating relationships. In furtherance of this purpose, the foundation will create public awareness about the dangers of unhealthy relationships and potential dating violence; raise funds for college educational programs on the subject; and fund grants to agencies and colleges to sponsor programs to disseminate information about dating violence.

What it reported doing in 2018

The kristin mitchell foundation funded programs at colleges and awarded grants to inform and educate young adults about the warning signs and dangers associated with unhealthy dating relationships.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Transfer-based 990-EZ. The 990-EZ reports grants or member benefits, but it does not separate enough spending to show the nonprofit’s full delivery mix.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 7
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -62,596.5%; rating input score 0; 0th 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: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -44.2% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -16.4% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.3% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.