The Mentoring Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270170750
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Little Rock, AR, USA
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Adult, Child Matching Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$234,700
Expenses
$290,939
Assets
$77,012
Liabilities
$10,321

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN SOWERS (CHAIRMAN): $88,400 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mentoring project seeks to respond to the american crisis of fatherlessness by inspiring and equipping faith communities to mentor fatherless youth.

What it reported doing in 2016

TMP is an advocaty and training organization that serves as a liason between faith communities and matching agencies to provide mentors for fatherless youth. TMP provides training materials, mentor recruitment, and assists with the creation of sustainable mentoring communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 61% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 10th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -24%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.26; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.4%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.8% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $291K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $88K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2011 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.