SGSM Network (Formerly South Grand Senior Ministry)

Legal name: Sgsm Network Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
300152463
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2013
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
St Louis, MO, USA
Phone
3146649700
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Religion Related N.E.C.
Affiliation
Religious (unspecified)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$635,937
Expenses
$883,086
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SHEALA VAST-BINDER (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • ELIZABETH ROSCANO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ELIZABETH ROSCANO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $55,880 total reported compensation
  • SHEALA VAST-BINDER (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $6,969 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission is to organize individual faith communities to build dynamic partnerships (clusters) that coordinate, cooperate, and collaborate to improve the quality of life of older adults.

What it reported doing in 2013

Effective december 31, 2013 sgsm network, inc. (EIN 30-0152463) merged with mission: st. Louis (EIN 20-8983607). Through the merger, sgsm and mission: st. Louis believe the merger will allow the surviving corporation, mission: st. Louis, to better serve the needs of the underprivileged in st. Louis, and, in particular, will allow expansion of sgsm's programs based on the combination of the two organizations into one.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 87% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 82% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and assets have declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 95
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 7
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 92.3%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $38.46 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -38.9%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.1%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -200% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 92.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $815K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $56K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2012 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 48/100.