Pro-Vision, Inc.

Legal name: Pro-vision Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
760336711
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Official website data refreshed
Jul 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2025
Location
Houston, TX, USA
Phone
8328048814
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Protestant
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,440,155
Expenses
$2,584,608
Assets
$18,742,268
Liabilities
$8,212,418

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROYNELL YOUNG (CEO AND FOUNDER, BOARD MEMBER)
  • DIANA SEIFERT (CAO/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROYNELL YOUNG (CEO AND FOUNDER, BOARD MEMBER): $261,468 total reported compensation
  • DIANA SEIFERT (CAO/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $131,250 total reported compensation
  • DONALD R CUNNINGHAM (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $75,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Pro-Vision, Inc. was created to inspire hope and purpose into young people, families and communities, through access to academic, economic, and social enrichment opportunities. Pro-Vision has evolved into an organization which works with young people in general, young men _and_ young women. Because Mr. Young believes that our young women are equally if not more valuable than the young men, we have added the S.H.E. (Strong, Healthy and Empowered) program to help develop their virtue and character. Pro-Vision sits in the heart of a food desert. It has brought about a commercial working farm that not only feeds individuals in the community, but sells product to grocery stores as well as restaurants. This is important to Mr. Young because it speaks to the sustainability of Pro-Vision, its programs and the economic freedom that brings independence to the community. The.

What it reported doing in 2025

The affordable housing program has been a long-term goal of the organization to assist residents in securing comfortable housing at a cost they can afford as a way to improve the quality of life in the community. The housing initiative will transform underused, industrial, and inner-city properties, in a once desolate and forgotten neighborhood, into a large and thriving affordable housing community. This activity of the model not only assume that improved housing stock will enhance the physical space of a neighborhood, but it will also enhance community members' well-being and civic responsibility. The organization has accumulated 64 acres in the community with the goal to secure additional acreage which will allow the construction of affordable housing units in a mixed income community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 73% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.9%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 84.9%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.12 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.9%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.25; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.44; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.1%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 87.9% of revenue deployed · 84.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $2.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $261K · 12 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.