Pvamu

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
752121158
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Prairie View, TX, USA
Phone
7135283535
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alumni Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$200,182
Expenses
$263,100
Assets
$195,415
Liabilities
$711

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MR MARK FALLS (PRESIDENT)
  • MRS CHARLOTTE JEFFERSON-HIGGINS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MR CARL L YOUNG (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • MS KIMBERLEY RUNNELS (PAST PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MR MARK FALLS (PRESIDENT)
  • MRS CHARLOTTE JEFFERSON-HIGGINS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MS BEVERLY WILLIAMS HATCHETT (SECRETARY)

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 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To maintain the alumni for the college the purpose of the association shall be to form a union of pvamu alumni, ex-students and interested citizens of similar aspirations for the perpetuation of prairie view a&m unversity through alumni communication, service and support.

What it reported doing in 2022

Alumini

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.9%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 72.2%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 21st 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -31.4%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.74; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.9% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.5% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.9% of revenue deployed · 72.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $190K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2019 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.