SHAPE Community Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237176982
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2009
Location
Houston, TX, USA
Phone
7135210629
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Ethnic, Immigrant Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,183,458
Expenses
$676,148
Assets
$2,353,478
Liabilities
$230,854

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Nedzra Johnson Ward (President)
  • Ifueko Omorogbe (Vice President)
  • Deloyd T Parker Jr (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Deloyd T Parker Jr (Executive Director): $34,099 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To improve the quality of life for people of African descent through programs and activities emphasizing Unity, Self-Determination, Collective Work & Responsibility, Cooperative Economics, Purpose, Creativity, and Faith.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Family Strengthening & Empowerment Programs include the After School Enrichment Program (ASEP), which serves children ages 5-13 and their caregivers, primarily single parents and extremely low-income families. ASEP promotes academic and life-choice success for students through homework assistance, tutorial study, life skills, and cultural sharing experiences during the school year. In addition, parent support group meetings are held biweekly on Wednesdays, with 100% participation, to address parenting skills issues, challenges, strategies, and family strengthening and empowerment. See Schedule O The annual Summer Enrichment Program (SEP) offers an 8-week, full-day program for children and youth, featuring emotional learning, meditation, physical activities, arts and crafts, language, history, financial literacy, academics, and weekly caregiver support group meetings. ASEP programs operate on average for 38 weeks of the year, serving 45 youth and 60 caregivers during the school year, and 95 SEP youth and approximately 105 caregivers during the eight-week summer session.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 46%; rating input score 46
  • Program expense ratio: 82.5%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 51; 51st 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: Limited
  • 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: 42.9%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.48; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 46% of revenue deployed · 82.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $558K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $34K · 5 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $615K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 46/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 51/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.