Serve Houston

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
464883584
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Houston, TX, USA
Phone
7135015802
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$111,255
Expenses
$168,005
Assets
$61,475
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ginger HARRIS 0116-0616 (executive director)

Highest reported compensation

  • ginger HARRIS 0116-0616 (executive director): $65,821 total reported compensation
  • ashley hurley (director): $7,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Serve houston is a community of sKilled volunteers and impact organizations collaborating for the good of our city. our purpose is to collectively take on local challenges and restore communities, fight for justice, and bring hope where it's needed most.

What it reported doing in 2016

Serve houston desires to collectively take on local challenges of the community by connecting highly skilled volunteers to local non-profits in houston. Serve houston accomplishes this by recruiting, training and launching volunteers to work alongside vetted nonprofits through individual and group projects that increase capacity for the organizations. In 2016, serve houston volunteers donated 900 volunteer hours to 12 nonprofits and met 94 needs. The total value of service given to nonprofits in 2016 was $28,282.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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

SUPPORTED - 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: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 89%; rating input score 89
  • 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: 75%; rating input score 75; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: -51%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.37; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 43.6%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -44.9% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -44.9% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -64.1% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 89% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $150K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $66K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2015 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.