Rotary International Rotary Club of District 5840 to Combat Human Trafficking
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 881211831
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2022–2022
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2021
- Location
- Uvalde, TX, USA
- Phone
- 8304848874
- Rating
- 36
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $13,944
- Expenses
- $9,262
- Assets
- $7,098
- Liabilities
- $108
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Jo Ann Browne (President)
People named in this filing
- Jo Ann Browne (President)
- Debbie Martin (Secretary)
- Cara Hiebert (Treasurer)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
As a Club, we envision taking action through our Focus Areas in Texas to significantly decrease human trafficking in D5840 communities; as well as making an impact to combat human trafficking internationally. We see ourselves accomplishing this by making D5840 Rotary Clubs our distribution channel for combating human trafficking throughout the 44 counties in our District through education and awareness.
What it reported doing in 2022
Our club met either in person or on Zoom at least once per month, hearing from prominent individuals in law enforcement, the justice system, and non-government organizations focused on eradicating human trafficking. We developed a strategic plan to present to Rotary Clubs in our district, and other groups a presentation with important information consisting of government provided statistics and facts, and ways to help our communities to detect and prevent child sexual exploitation, labor and human trafficking. We call it S P E A R. S = Support the Vulnerable, P=Partnerships, E=Empower Youth, A=Awareness, R=Reduce Demand
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Membership-supported. 60% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
REVIEW - 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 total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 60
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 33.6%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.77; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.