The Michelle Project
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 814075817
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2020–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2019
- Location
- Spring, TX, USA
- Phone
- 8324080973
- Rating
- 47
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Youth Development Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $6,244
- Expenses
- $5,290
- Assets
- $1,360
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Lezlie Lucas Ponder (Board of Directors President)
- Sharoma Scurry Graves (Executive Director)
People named in this filing
- Lezlie Lucas Ponder (Board of Directors President)
- Raiquaichia Raybon (Board of Directors Secretary)
- Teana Cruse (Board of Directors Treasurer)
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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Nonprofit- youth development focuses on education.
What it reported doing in 2025
Linda's Christmas Crate served one families for Christmas. We provided packages with gifts, food, games, and gift cards.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 16
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 52
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 14.6%; rating input score 15
- Program expense ratio: 17.2%; rating input score 17
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 15.3%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.26; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 27% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -13.3% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 14.6% of revenue deployed · 17.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $909 in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 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: Mission deployment rate scored 15/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 17/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.