Nfib Young Entrepreneur Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
621557196
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Nashville, TN, USA
Phone
6158725800
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Business and Industry

Reported finances

Revenue
$36,748
Expenses
$269,428
Assets
$372,658
Liabilities
$99

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Tammy S Boehms (President/CFO)

Highest reported compensation

  • JUANITA D DUGGAN (Director): $1,274,683 total reported compensation
  • BRAD CLOSE (VP): $533,928 total reported compensation
  • David Addington (SECRETARY/PARLIAMENTARIAN): $516,878 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the nfib young entrepreneur foundation is to educate young people about the critical role of small business and american free-enterprise system and to help students interested in small business and entrepreneurship further their education. By promoting the lessons of free enterprise in the classroom, the foundation hopes to build the next generation of small-business owners and entrepreneurs.

What it reported doing in 2018

At a meeting of the board of directors in february 2018, a resolution was adopted for the dissolution and termination of nfib young entrepreneur foundation. As part of this process, all program activities ceased. Grants and refunds to donors shown on the statement of functional activities represent the organization's disbursement of restricted funds in accordance with the donors' directives.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 75% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 90% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 93.3%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.29 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.3%; rating input score 98; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -633.2%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.38; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 80.3%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -15.4% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.6% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 93.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 15 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $251K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.3M · 19 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 16 of 18 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 9 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 17/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.