South Hampton Facility
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 431541821
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2022–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- St Louis, MO, USA
- Phone
- 3146479711
- Rating
- 40
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alcohol, Drug Abuse, Treatment Only
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $24,004
- Expenses
- $25,829
- Assets
- $117,296
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MARK GRAYSON (President)
- WES MUERHOFF (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- MARK GRAYSON (President)
- WES MUERHOFF (Vice President)
- WILL CONWAY (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our primary purpose is to provide support to the suffering alcoholic who wants to get well. These services include providing meeting space that is open to the public in the form of 1 hour meetings throughout the week that the alcoholic can attend to find support.
What it reported doing in 2025
Provide literature for alcoholics in the form of informational pamphlets, and our main text and work books titled "Alcoholics Anonymous", "AA 12 Steps and 12 Traditions and other support materials. AA Hampton facility hosted 1,716 AA meetings in 2025. Average member attendance was 12 per meetings.We also provide service opportunities for recovering alcoholics such as chairing meetings, cleaning the building, and maintaining outdoor landscaping. We also have Trustees who report to the Board of Directors. these trustees provide minor building repairs, contractor repair supervision, and purchasing of supplies. No person at the Hampton facility is compensated for service work nor are the Board of Directors. We are a 100% volunteer organization.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue 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: 3
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 45
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 2.7%; rating input score 3
- Program expense ratio: 2.5%; rating input score 3
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -7.6%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.54; rating input score 82; 82nd 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: -18.8% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 0% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 2.7% of revenue deployed · 2.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $654 in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 7 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 3/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 3/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.