Pgc Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201443276
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2014
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2014, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Gulfport, MS, USA
Phone
5867461057
Rating
44
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Private Grantmaking Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$63,151
Expenses
$60,887
Assets
$22,834
Liabilities
$7,160

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Thomas M MacIntosh (President)

People named in this filing

  • Thomas M MacIntosh (President)
  • Evelinda P MacIntosh (Books and Logistics)
  • Jason Schomer (Trustee)

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 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

1) To provide assistance to existing humanitarian efforts in developing countries. 2) To fund new projects that improve the living conditions of poor communities. 3) To raise funds and disburse them with the objective of bettering people's lives who are in situations and or locations where minimal opportunity for improvement is available. 4) To supervise and manage the disbursement of funds combined with training for the purpose of building self-sustainable projects that can proceed without ongoing outside financial dependence.

What it reported doing in 2014

Training and member care- We travel to different locations within the Philippines and conduct Bible studies, discipleship training, conflict resolution, counseling, catastrophe debriefing, etc. An average of 15-40 people are benefited for each seminar session that is conducted.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

MIXED - 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: 2
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 2.3%; rating input score 2
  • Program expense ratio: 2.4%; rating input score 2

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.6%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.38; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.31; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 70.3%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -110.9% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -13.4% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 29.3% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 2.3% of revenue deployed · 2.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2012 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 2/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.