More Than Wheels Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
020528886
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Concord, NH, USA
Phone
8664552522
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Transportation Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$-190,276
Expenses
$250,497
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

People named in this filing

  • DAVID REEVES (CHAIRMAN)
  • JOHN GARGASZ (VICE CHAIR)
  • ANNE FARNSWORTH (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. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To help struggling individuals & families break the cycle of poor financial decision making by using the car buying process to catalyze lasting change, financial stability and control.

What it reported doing in 2016

More than wheels couples the need for reliable transportation with a set of transformative services designed to produce long-term family stability and self-sufficiency. Using behavior change techniques, and providing financial education and credit repair services, and supporting the practice of making an on-time payments for car loans, more than wheels works with low to moderate income individuals and families to obtain a new or slightly used, but certified, car through a set of car dealer and bank and credit union partners. More than wheels helps clients to select a car that fits into their budget and retains good value after the loan is repaid, thereby ending a cycle of poor financial decisions made even worse by poor car choices. Mtw partially guarantees its loans based on program confidence and history of client success. More than wheels provides ongoing support and advocacy for the life of the loan (generally 66 months), monitors credit scores annually, and provides additional counseling or education as needed to achieve long term success.

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 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 54
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 48%; rating input score 48
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.33 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 23rd 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: 62.5%; rating input score 62; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: -231.6%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -47.5% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -25.6% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -33.4% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75% of revenue deployed · 48% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $120K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2016
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.