Minority Scholarship Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
621589300
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015, Form 990-N 2009
Location
Rock Hill, SC, USA
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Reported finances

Revenue
$13,292
Expenses
$39,019
Assets
$510,581
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CARLOS BRYSON (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KATHY BARBER (BOARD MEMBER)
  • DAWN JOHNSON (BOARD MEMBER)
  • PAUL KUTZ (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. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The minority scholarship foundation was established to assist with post- secondary education for african-american students from the rock hill/fort mill area. The dream of a college degree is being made a reality for these students by awarding financial contributions to their respective institutes of higher learning.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 70% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 44
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.5%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 17.9%; rating input score 18
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -193.6%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 13.09; rating input score 71; 71st 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 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

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

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.5% of revenue deployed · 17.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $7K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.