Mount Olive Ministries Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
640884158
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2013, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Mount Olive, MS, USA
Phone
6017974377
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Delinquency Prevention

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$907,725
Expenses
$499,237
Assets
$1,470,542
Liabilities
$298,874

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TONY DUCKWORTH SR (PRESIDENT/EXEC DIR)

Highest reported compensation

  • TONY DUCKWORTH SR (PRESIDENT/EXEC DIR): $85,900 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Glorifying god by revitalizing the mount olive neighborhoods and neighboring counties through spiritual and community development.

What it reported doing in 2024

The fundraising goal for 2024 was to add 1.5 million dollars to the ministry account for the purpose of building grace christian school a new school. However, we added one million dollars to the account for the purpose of the new school. Mount olive ministries purchased five (5) portable classroom trailers to lower the cost of the new school. The trailers were $75,000 each. After meeting with the madison school district in madison, Mississippi, the school financial director reduced the trailers to $5,000 each. This reduction will allow gcs to build the newschool at a lower cost.a local dozier company cleared weeds around the property line on the new property. The property line assist volunteers with identifying the boundaries whenever they are assisting with volunteer work.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 90% 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 available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 60
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 39.8%; rating input score 40
  • Program expense ratio: 72.1%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $18.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 56; 56th 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: 68.7%; rating input score 69; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 45%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.95; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.2%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.6% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 39.8% of revenue deployed · 72.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $360K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $86K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 27 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.