The Ezer Initiative

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
830849639
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2023–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2022, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Hampton, VA, USA
Phone
7573170200
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$99,686
Expenses
$100,556
Assets
$9,700
Liabilities
$710

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Patricia Coaker (President)

People named in this filing

  • KECIA ST CLAIR (Executive Dir.)
  • Brenda Smith (Secretary)
  • Patricia Coaker (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To bridge the GAP between needed resources and those in need.

What it reported doing in 2023

465 Community referrals 24 emergency service recipients 12 discharges 102 advocacy recipients 336 initial contact 6 currently housed 386 annual outreach recipients 520 hot meals distributed 2356 lbs of food distributed by food pantry TOTAL IMPACT 2387 UNDUPLICATED INDIVIDUALS 1907 Total Volunteer Hours @$33.49/hr totaling $63865.43

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
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and assets have declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.4%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 93.6%; rating input score 94

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.9%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.1; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -50.7% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -51.2% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.4% of revenue deployed · 93.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $94K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.