Spilled Milk Community Outreach Dba Spilled Milk Social Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
921399913
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
5123176408
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$317,231
Expenses
$362,370
Assets
$167,061
Liabilities
$142,387

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jonathan Lucas Hernandez (President)

People named in this filing

  • Alison Epperson (Director)
  • Stella Maxwell-Putman (Director)
  • Jonathan Lucas Hernandez (President)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Spilled milk community outreach dba spilled milk social club seeks to facilitate creative play with children to promote the development of problem solving and communication skills, calculated risk-taking, and resilience.

What it reported doing in 2025

In this short year, our organization granted over $7,000 in tuition assistance to the families of 9 children attending our onsite after school program, thus providing access to high quality child care programming for families who otherwise could not afford it.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 93% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Accountability: 65
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.5%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 81%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.81 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 91.6%; rating input score 92; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -14.2%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.46; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.85; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -79.6% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 37.3% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 30.4% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.5% of revenue deployed · 81% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $293K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.