Network of Community Ministries Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
752060900
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Richardson, TX, USA
Phone
9722348880
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,620,165
Expenses
$10,887,472
Assets
$7,468,902
Liabilities
$160,124

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ABIGAIL KAUFFMAN thru 1025 (CEO)
  • Celeste Sneeze (CEO-FROM 10/25)
  • LINDA REED (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • ABIGAIL KAUFFMAN thru 1025 (CEO): $152,158 total reported compensation
  • LEE ANN MILLS (CFO): $118,300 total reported compensation
  • AMANDA PELS (CSO): $106,250 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Caring, coaching and empowering networks neighbors as they seek an improved quality of life.

What it reported doing in 2024

Network of Community Ministries serves the 14 zip codes in Dallas County of Richardson ISD and served over 67,000 individuals last year through over 230,000 units of service. All clients must meet eligibility and residence requirements to receive services. Network is supported by businesses, individuals and a coalition of religious, civic and social organizations and relies upon foundation and corporate grants. In addition, residents of the community volunteer in each of our program areas, supervised by a paid volunteer manager. Current programming at Network includes Emergency Services (food, clothing, and utilities), Seniors Net (supplemental food, Senior Day, handyman service, companion calls, information, and referrals), Stabilization Programs (Case Management and Stability Planning, Career Services, and Financial Planning), Mobile Food Pantry, as well as seasonal youth programming including Toyland Express and Tools for Schools.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 78% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 91
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 92.4%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $25.95 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.5%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.69; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.3%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.8% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.7% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96% of revenue deployed · 92.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $10.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $152K · 18 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.