Mission Greenspoint

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
760541595
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Houston, TX, USA
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$353,522
Expenses
$319,359
Assets
$425,400
Liabilities
$37,593

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DON MARVIN (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KEITH MACKELLAR (BOARD MEMBER)
  • JUDY HOYA (SECRETARY)
  • DON MARVIN (VICE PRESIDENT)

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 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To present christ to the residents of the area by supplying their physical needs with a assistance from a food pantry, clothes closet, educational classes, and a pregency center for their material needs.

What it reported doing in 2020

The mission runs a food pantry for residents who are in need of assistance for food. The individuals can come in on either an emergency or a periodic basis. For the individuals who come in on a periodic basis they are allowed so much food each month depending on the family size and need. Need is determined by family size, income, district residence, and other factors to werify that there is actual need for the assistance. The individuals requiring emergency assistance have less verification, but must still be able to prove actual need. However, these individuals are limited to the one enemercy time for help unless they meet all of the qualifications at soem later date.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.8%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 69.6%; rating input score 70
  • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.7%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.33; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -12% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -9.2% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.3% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.8% of revenue deployed · 69.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $222K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2013 to 2020
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.