South Union Community Development Inc South Union Cdc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 760588536
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2022–2022
- Forms available
- Form 990 2022, Form 990-N 2020
- Location
- Houston, TX, USA
- Phone
- 7134198352
- Rating
- 55
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Family Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $325,858
- Expenses
- $195,751
- Assets
- $154,655
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- EFREM B JERNIGAN (PRESIDENT)
- ALVIS PRINCE (VICE PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- EFREM B JERNIGAN (PRESIDENT)
- ALVIS PRINCE (VICE PRESIDENT)
- RON O'NEAL (TREASURER)
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 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Sowing seeds of success in youth, exposing them to science, technology, engineering, and math careers.
What it reported doing in 2022
Stem program project: sunshine in sunnyside (solar farm) the visionary goal of the solar farm is to become the largest urban 50mw solar farm that can provide elecricity to the nearby community, power the sunnyside tech internet towers, and run the energy necessary to grow food resources in our aquaponics garden which will aid the citizens within the food desert areas of houston.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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 - Most voting board members are independent and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 48
- Transparency & Controls: 58
- Accountability: 76
- Sustainability: 69
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 42.7%; rating input score 43
- Program expense ratio: 71.1%; rating input score 71
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 80%; rating input score 80; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 19th 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 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 39.9%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 42.7% of revenue deployed · 71.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $137K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 18 of 20 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.