Prospect Mountain Therapeutic Riding Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
208992679
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015, Form 990-EZ 2014, Form 990-N 2009
Location
Scurry, TX, USA
Phone
4695952019
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Reported finances

Revenue
$69,620
Expenses
$69,620
Assets
$69,620
Liabilities
$69,620

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

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • theresa lisenby (CEO)

People named in this filing

  • theresa lisenby (CEO)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Prospect Mountain has closed its doors after years of helping disabled persons gain improved physical and mental abilities

What it reported doing in 2015

Prospect Mountain has partnered with home depot IN an effort to give back to the community. For persons in financial or emergency help. We make available building and home needs from our donation received. Our goal is to give back to the people who are in need from the in kind donations we receive.

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.
  • 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 18
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -14.2% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 29.3% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $70K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 39 of 40 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.