Shepherd Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
952293659
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Newport Beach, CA, USA
Phone
7149285192
Rating
34
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$22,550
Expenses
$20,762
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

People named in this filing

  • TIM COX (OFFICER)
  • ERLENE LEMING (KEY PERSONEL)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Social and religious rehabilitation.

What it reported doing in 2023

Social and religious rehabilitation. Members visit prisons and rehab centers, teaching christianity through personal experiences. Films, shows, bibles and literature are distributed.

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

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 12
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 12.7%; rating input score 13
  • Program expense ratio: 13.8%; rating input score 14
  • 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.9%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.5% per year; rating input score 0; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.3% per year; rating input score 0; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.8% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 12.7% of revenue deployed · 13.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 2 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2023
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 13/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.