These Old Bonez Enterprises
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 823109961
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2023–2023
- Forms available
- Form 990 2023, Form 990-N 2017
- Location
- Proctor, AR, USA
- Phone
- 9012050597
- Rating
- 42
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community Health Systems
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $855,525
- Expenses
- $850,967
- Assets
- $863,525
- Liabilities
- $850,967
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
59 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- SHERESE GREEN (DIRECTOR): $55,944 total reported compensation
- GLENDA SMITH (NONEMPLOYEE): $54,411 total reported compensation
- LAKEISH BINION: $52,059 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Bridging the gap in home healthcare for those who are over the income limit to receive assistance to get services for the Affordable Healthcare Program while not being able to afford the care.
What it reported doing in 2023
Bridging the gap in home healthcare for those who are over the income limit to receive assistance to get services but are too short of income to afford care.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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 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: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 86
- Sustainability: 32
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 3rd 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: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0.5%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.01; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.99; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 92.3%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 2 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $829K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $56K · 59 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 11 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 56 filed money-flow records
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Independent members within voting members did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.