Operation Progress Fort Worth

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
843130758
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Fort Worth, TX, USA
Phone
2812221174
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$91,795
Expenses
$221,780
Assets
$335,220
Liabilities
$4,499

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MYESHIA SMITH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • DR JOHNNY NHAN (BOARD PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MYESHIA SMITH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $97,810 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Operation progress fort worth empowers underserved youth to become educated, ethical and productive adults who reach their full potential and positively contribute to society. To do this, we are committed to supporting participating scholars from elementary school through college with our comprehensive program called the five pillars of success.

What it reported doing in 2024

Comprehensive expanded learning: our programs are rooted in our five pillars of success. The five pillars of success are academics, life skills, health and wellness, service and safety, and support. The goal of the five pillars of success is for the scholars to build character, social competency, leadership skills, and emotional intelligence. The expanded learning programs provided fundamental educational opportunities that scholars otherwise would not have and will include arts, music, coping skills and fitness.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 86% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 82% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 64.3%; rating input score 64
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.34 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 84.8%; rating input score 85; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -141.6%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.51; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 44.1%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.4% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.4% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.7% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 64.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $143K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $98K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.