Project Walk - Austin

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263245349
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
5127194300
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Rehabilitative Medical Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,958
Expenses
$27,001
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Keith-Ann Steed (Executive Director/Preside)
  • Rolland Wagner (Vice-President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Keith-Ann Steed (Executive Director/Preside): $5,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Project Walk - Austin exists in order to achieve three goals: make recovery-based training the standard, make our training program more accessible, and to change the perception of spinal cord injury recovery - that recovery is possible. Project Walk - Austin is a physical training program for people with spinal cord injuries where hard work leads to greater: confidence, independence, mobility, and Hope.

What it reported doing in 2015

Provided a social network of support for clients, families, and friends that need advice, answers, and encouragement as they recover from a spinal cord injury. This is done through social media, email, dinners, and one on one interactions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 21
  • Sustainability: 10
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 81.5%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: Limited
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -125.8%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.5%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -69.6% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -79.8% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -86% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 81.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $22K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $5K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2013 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.