TaylorGlobalConsult

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
271734770
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
5124678431
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$184,765
Expenses
$200,444
Assets
$65,372
Liabilities
$307

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • William D Taylor (President)

People named in this filing

  • William D Taylor (President)
  • Mark K Leaverton Esq (Board Member)
  • Howard Morrison (Chairman)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Mission consult and support

What it reported doing in 2024

Missions consult and support. Mentoring stratigic Latin American Christian leaders, in two cohoerts of younger and older men, coming from Argentina, Chile, Columbia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, and USA. Publishing in partnership with the Crux Institute, https://institutecrux.org/, the publication The Crisis of the Family in Latin America. Written and edited in Spanish. Support provided to Crux Institute for recording and video equipement, video programs for on-line study programs, upgrading web and interent educational services. Investment in Guatemala based radio and YouTube program Coffee, Culture and Christianity. Friday evening program with wide audience. Scholarship awards for Latin American scholars to enable them to research and complete PHD dissertation requirements.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Multi-channel. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 36% for direct work, 45% for grants, and 19% for member benefits.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 54
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 93.7%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • 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: 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: -8.5%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.33; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 93.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $188K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.