Mishawaka Columbus Club Home Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
351960904
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019, Form 990-N 2018
Location
Osceola, IN, USA
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$319,276
Expenses
$211,212
Assets
$290,368
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES P HOLT (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JAMES P HOLT (PRESIDENT)
  • JOE MAMO (DIRECTOR)
  • PAUL MCMAHON (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 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization provides the facility in which the mishawaka columbus club's members serve in their charitable capacity as knights of columbus.

What it reported doing in 2019

The donation of 60,000 to st. Monica catholic church was used for the following: renovation of the parish hall including new and renovated bathrooms, updated walls, ceiling, lighting and floors, repair water leak from handicap ramp, build a brides room, acquire new tables and chairs for the facility. Donation st. Bavo parish mishawaka was used for excavation of the portion of the school parking lot to make way for playground, renovation of parish offices parking lot on 7th st. And reshingling of the office roof. There was also boiler repairs of approimately 5,000. Donation to queen of peace catholic church in mishawaka was used to install updated internet-based phone systems and upgraded technology for the school. The donation to st. Joseph catholic church was used to support church tuck pointing and ceiling of masonry, rectory roof replacement and church hvac unit replacement.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 98.2%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 33.8%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.37; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

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

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 98.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 335 of 335 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.