Sheena V Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454049635
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Dallas, TX, USA
Phone
2147272685
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,000
Expenses
$5,856
Assets
$4,956

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NEYSA OSBORNE (PRESIDENT/TR)

People named in this filing

  • NEYSA OSBORNE (PRESIDENT/TR)
  • GEORGE SHEBAN (VICE PRESIDE)
  • BRYAN STARNES (SECRETARY)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to empower kids in need to live hope dream. By providing the necessary tools to enrich their lives, strengthen their hope and fulfill their dreams: the sheena v. Foundation will raise money for childhood cancer research and underserved native american communities

What it reported doing in 2024

Our mission, to empower kids in need to live, hope and dream. This is provided through the necessary tools to enrich their lives, strengthen their hope and fulfuill their dreams through raising money for childhood cancer research and underserved native american communities. Our first year was spent preparing the plan to accomplish these goals and find vendors for support and donors for the upcoming plan.

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 total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.6%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 41.4%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.85; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -20.6% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -18% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -10.1% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58.6% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $6K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.