Ratcliff Thomas Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
473698726
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Upper Marlboro, MD, USA
Phone
7038649607
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$18,500
Expenses
$18,000
Assets
$4,000
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Ratcliff Thomas (President)

People named in this filing

  • Ratcliff Thomas (President)
  • Laraysha Shaw (Secretary)
  • George Loving (Vice Chair)

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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Ratcliff Thomas Foundation, Inc. (RTF) believes that all persons regardless of economic status, ethnicity or gender should have access to the necessary resources to become a successful and productive member of the community. RTF also believes that strong community engagement is the key for impacting social change...especially for the youth! RTF provides programs and services, which includes a Mentoring Program for our youth, Community Outreach/Sports Services Division, and the Seniors Program, which will feature the 'Senior Sunrise' initiative. RTF's ultimate goal is to invoke social change for the economically under privileged of all ages in Alexandria, VA (AVA), District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia (DMV).

What it reported doing in 2016

Cora Kelly Community Day- Held on 06/11/16. "Guest Speaker at the Community Forum on Privilege and Race" "4th Annual Blacktie Gala" 6th Annual Alexandria Youth Art Festival Alexandria Sportsman Club 2015 "Guest Speaker at Concerned Citizens Network of Alexandria Award Ceremony"

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.3%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: 2.7%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.22; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 20.9% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 200% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $18K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 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
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.