Montgomery County Community Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
760082098
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Spring, TX, USA
Phone
2813638158
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,318,476
Expenses
$654,119
Assets
$12,080,997
Liabilities
$172,599

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Julie P Martineau (President & CEO)
  • Christin Allphin (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Julie P Martineau (President & CEO): $115,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the Montgomery County Community Foundation (MCCF) is to provide leadership in Montgomery County by directing sustainable financial resources that strengthen our community and improve the quality of life for current and future generations.

What it reported doing in 2024

Scholarships: High school, community college and medical students are awarded grants to further their post high school educational pursuits. During 2024, 25 students received scholarships from legacy funds to expand their chance for success. Each fund targets a different population or interest, such as a local high school, specific attributes like service above self, academic performance, financial need or sports. Each fund has a Selection Committee approved by the Board which uses fair and objective criteria to select their nominee. All criteria, committees, and final scholarship recipients are approved by the Distribution Committee and Board of Directors.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 61% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 76% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.2%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 78.3%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.69 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 83.2%; rating input score 83; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 50.4%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 18.47; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.6%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.2% of revenue deployed · 78.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $512K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $115K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 28 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 27 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 21/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.