Sibley Plaza Resident Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521689063
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2016
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2024085552
Rating
55
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Homeowners & Tenants Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$46,965
Expenses
$56,690
Assets
$98,060
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANNE B CLARK (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ANNE B CLARK (PRESIDENT)
  • MARIE KING (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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Sibley plaza resident association, inc. (spra) provides an array of services to the elderly, youth, homeless, and individuals with AIDS. Spra acts as a liason between other nonprofit and governmental entities to provide housing for those less fortunate. It endeavors to provide social programs for these individuals to alleviate the stress and hardships that they encounter.

What it reported doing in 2016

Hopwa - housing opportunities for persons with AIDS spra works with safe haven ministries to assist and find housing options for individuals infected with AIDS.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. 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: 30
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 31.7%; rating input score 32
  • Program expense ratio: 26.3%; rating input score 26

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -20.7%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.73; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.2%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 48.3% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.3% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 31.7% of revenue deployed · 26.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $15K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2011 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 32/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.