S Tracy Howard Project Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
611655581
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Flower Mound, TX, USA
Phone
2149387182
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Service Clubs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$520,089
Expenses
$587,096
Assets
$268,815
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The S. Tracy Howard Project passionately works to eliminate hunger in low to moderate income communities by providing free hot nutritious meals to children and teens 18 years and younger

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 89.5%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 3rd 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: -12.9%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.46; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 89.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $525K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2014 to 2022
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.