Millennials for STEM Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
822755739
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2018–2018
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Dallas, TX, USA
Phone
2142222222
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Specialized Education Institutions

Reported finances

Revenue
$48,601
Expenses
$33,145
Assets
$40,268
Liabilities
$24,812

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Noble Madu (Director)
  • Christiana Yebra (Director)
  • Broadrick Umeh (Director)

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

Millennials for STEM aims to empower and mentor Generation Z through STEM related experiences and educational opportunities. Our global mission is to play a role in moving the horizon forward for leaders to come.

What it reported doing in 2018

Millennials for STEM's primary service accomplishment in 2018 was STEM in the Park. In the summer of 2018, we mobilized over 1,000 event attendees, 150 Millennial volunteers and 20 sponsors for a free community event in Dallas' biggest park. The park was full of science, technology, engineering and mathematics games and food for the public to enjoy.

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 86% 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 and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 45
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 38.1%; rating input score 38
  • Program expense ratio: 55.8%; rating input score 56

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 31.8%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.21; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.62; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 38.1% of revenue deployed · 55.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $18K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 38/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 56/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.