Sow Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263384851
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2011
Forms available
Form 990 2011, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Rome, GA, USA
Phone
7062048269
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Homeless Shelters

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$70,654
Expenses
$62,195
Assets
$18,825
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To assist people in obtaining food, shelter and work so as to co-exist in a civilized society. The programs are designed to empower individuals who are motivated to become self sufficient and better their lives for a brighter future. Programs and services are available to all regardless of faith, race and gender.

What it reported doing in 2011

Sow, inc fills prescriptions and assist with clietns who have no insurance and no financial ability to pay for medical services. We also assist clients with gas, electric deposits, deposits to secure housing and help to keep their utility bills and rent paid to keep from losing their homes. We also provide a housing shelter to help clients in transition who have no shelter.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 60th 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; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $56K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.