Mile High First Sergeant Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
811225842
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Buckley Afb, CO, USA
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,551
Expenses
$14,003
Assets
$7,157
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

People named in this filing

  • CHRISTOPHER M BYRNE (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

To act as the essential link between leadership and members to assure success while taking care of people who live and work on buckley air force base. To provide addtl financial assistance to the buckley afb community, with a focus on financial reflief during emergency situations

What it reported doing in 2017

Partnered with local businesses and private organizations to provide comprehensive meals for 418 buckley air force base members and their familiesdistributed food gift card relief to buckley afb members in need; ensured care and comfort for members and dependents during difficult personal hardshipsconducted installation-level complimentary food drive; served free meals to est. 300 personnel and raised morale for buckley afb military/civilian/family membersorganized 7 base level promotion recognition ceremonies; provided supplies/refreshments for guests; honored approx 126 promotees

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 88% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 90
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.1%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 88%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.47 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 80%; rating input score 80; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 81.6%; rating input score 82; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -11.6%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.51; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 31.5% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -36.5% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -66.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.1% of revenue deployed · 88% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $12K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 15 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2016 to 2017
  • 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.

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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.