Restore Does More Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
863324700
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2021
Forms available
Form 990 2021
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
5125374087
Rating
42
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health, General and Financing

Reported finances

Revenue
$68,430
Expenses
$12,209
Assets
$56,221
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

People named in this filing

  • ANGELA MELPOLDER (Manager)
  • ALEXANDRA SIOJO (Manager)

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 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To educate & support communities and Restore employees on the importance of wellness, and emplower everyone to seek out a proactive wellness path.

What it reported doing in 2021

Educate and support Restore employees on the importance of wellness and empower everyone to seek out a proactive wellness path. In 2021, 8 employees were assisted on this mission.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 98% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 43
  • Transparency & Controls: 63
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 17.8%; rating input score 18
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 82.2%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.6; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 17.8% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 2 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $12K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 18/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.