Small Places

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
854185029
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Houston, TX, USA
Phone
8326137547
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Agricultural Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,038,752
Expenses
$512,481
Assets
$2,914,761
Liabilities
$326,398

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Thomas Garcia-Prats (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Thomas Garcia-Prats (Executive Director): $64,723 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To nurture a culture of health in our communities to renew the bond between people place and food.

What it reported doing in 2024

Food Distribution: Through various distribution outlets including a farm stand farmers markets community programs and partners the farm will distribute produce with a focus on the surrounding communities. Distributions will be made free of charge and recipients will be advised of suggested donation amounts. Whether a recipient makes or does not make a donation will not affect the recipients eligibility to receive produce. Agritourism Field Trips and Education: The farm is a resource for educating area residents on healthy living. Through weekly field trips farm events and classes the farm is a focal point for the community to learn about food production gardening nutrition cooking healthy eating and a variety of other programs meant to provide the skills and tools for healthier living.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 73% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 86% 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

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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 30
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 13.8%; rating input score 14
  • Program expense ratio: 49.9%; rating input score 50
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.47 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 54; 54th 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; 72nd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 74.9%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.69; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.6%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 28.1% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 63.8% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 83.1% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 13.8% of revenue deployed · 49.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $256K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $65K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 45 of 45 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 14/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 54/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.