Oasis Ii Special Populations Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
050614278
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Georgetown, SC, USA
Rating
38
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Residential Mental Health Treatment

Reported finances

Revenue
$57,281
Expenses
$69,140
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MAZIE GRAHAM (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MAZIE GRAHAM (PRESIDENT)
  • KATHERINE SCOTT (DIRECTOR)
  • CHARLENA JOHNSON (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide daycare to special population

What it reported doing in 2015

To provide daycare to special populations with HIV Alzheimers dementia and other acute needs

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 16
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 16.5%; rating input score 17
  • Program expense ratio: 13.7%; rating input score 14

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -20.7%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.8%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -39.1% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -16.4% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -32.1% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 16.5% of revenue deployed · 13.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $9K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 7 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2012 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 17/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Series balance sheet did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.