R3 Fellowship of Ministries
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 473376932
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2015
- Forms available
- Form 990 2015
- Location
- Montgomery, TX, USA
- Phone
- 9362032802
- Rating
- 37
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Men's Service Clubs
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $130,249
- Expenses
- $99,658
- Assets
- $30,591
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ROBERT STOKES (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- ROBERT STOKES (PRESIDENT): $54,360 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To help strengthen men, women and marriages, to empower men and women to fulfill god's will for their life and to go outside the walls of the church and reach those who are lost and hurting.
What it reported doing in 2015
To minister in the community via bible study, marriage classes and religious retreats.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 89% 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
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 12
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 10
- Sustainability: 55
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 12.2%; rating input score 12
- Program expense ratio: 15.9%; rating input score 16
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
- Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: 23.5%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.31; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 54.5%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 12.2% of revenue deployed · 15.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 2 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $16K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $54K · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
- 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.
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 12/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 16/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.