The Welman Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
811116926
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Fort Worth, TX, USA
Phone
8179244000
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts Education

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,439,539
Expenses
$3,374,852
Assets
$201,579
Liabilities
$7,542

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Randall Ford (President)
  • Benjamin Robertson (President Elect)

People named in this filing

  • Ximena Antunez de Mayolo (Secretary)
  • Randall Ford (President)
  • Karen Fraser (Director)

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 Welman Project is on a mission to fill a classroom, not a landfill. We provide free supplies and support to teachers, along with the training, tools, and workspace they need to engage students in vital hands-on learning. The result is a community where waste is reduced, the burden on teachers is lessened, and creativity and ingenuity thrive in the classroom.

What it reported doing in 2024

With our educator resource program, we're tackling two big issues in our community - waste output generated by businesses and lack of resources in our schools - with one innovative solution: creative reuse. We collect surplus materials from companies and donate those items to classrooms, working one-on-one with teachers to provide free, curriculum-enhancing repurpose alternatives to purchasing new supplies. Providing free materials for their classroom provides immediate relief to teachers, giving them meaningful community support and significant cost savings to be able to stay on the job, and enabling them to focus on student outcomes rather than struggling to get the supplies they need. The teachers we serve overwhelmingly report feeling less stressed and better prepared to address their student's needs, both because of the ideas and materials received and the encouragement of coming to a place where they feel supported by the community. By enabling educators to utilize readily-available resources from the community rather than relying on the purchase of expensive educational materials, we're removing the district red tape and financial disparities that contribute to teacher burnout and inequity across our schools, leading to better outcomes for students long-term. In 2024, we kept 281 dumpsters worth of material from going to the landfill, served 6,588 educators, and distributed $2.7 million worth of supplies to schools.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 81% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 95
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 97.8%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: $66.54 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 23.5%; rating input score 24; 13th 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: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 1.9%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.06; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 105.9% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 48.3% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.9% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96% of revenue deployed · 97.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 42 of 44 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 24/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • 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.