The Guardians Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
451625374
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017, Form 990-N 2011
Location
Post Falls, ID, USA
Phone
2084491210
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$335,716
Expenses
$330,931
Assets
$325,202
Liabilities
$50,479

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

People named in this filing

  • MICHAEL L SHAW (Executive Dir.)

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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Direct assistance to military veterans and their families providing food and shelter. The guardians foundation works in collaboration with like-minded organizations such as the veterans administration, st. Vincent de paul and the union gospel mission.

What it reported doing in 2017

To provide direct assistance to military veterans and their families for both temporary and permanent housing, food and other necessities. The guardians foundation inc (the company) works as part of a team effort with the veterans administration, st. Vincent de paul, the union gospel mission as well as the local business community and private citizens.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 84% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 39
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.5%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 85.7%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $29.87 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 78.6%; rating input score 79; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.4%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.98; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.1% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.5% of revenue deployed · 85.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $284K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 27 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2011 to 2017
  • 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.

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: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.