The Mixtape Strategy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
990416987
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
6125015351
Rating
51
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Small Business Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$239,294
Expenses
$110,023
Assets
$129,271
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HOUSTON WHITE (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • HOUSTON WHITE (PRESIDENT)
  • TIM SULLIVAN (SECRETARY)
  • RONALD RICHARD (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. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mixtape strategy is the philanthropic arm of houston white enterprises, created to amplify and celebrate the strengths of vibrant communities like camdentown.

What it reported doing in 2024

The mixtape strategy in 2024 program services and accomplishments:- gave 300 hours of technical assistance 15 individuals and businesses looking to start businesses and businesses under $1 million in revenue. - 40% of businesses helped in restaurant industry.- 40% of businesses helped in retail trade industry- 20% of businesses helped in service industry - 20 new businesses were created with the mixtape strategy services. Our support for sweet renaissance coffee academy introduces diverse individuals, including non-primary english speakers, to the coffee business.- we regularly held community events both in camdentown and at venues such as the four seasons that promote and facilitate connection among people. $15,000 in grants deployed to entrepreneurs with growing, cultural businesses and organizations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 56% for direct work, and 44% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 21
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 14.3%; rating input score 14
  • Program expense ratio: 31%; rating input score 31
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 45th 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: 54%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.17; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 14.3% of revenue deployed · 31% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $34K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 14/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 26/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.