Union Cemetery of Whitemarsh Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
387143870
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Souderton, PA, USA
Phone
2157992945
Rating
48
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Cemeteries

Reported finances

Revenue
$98,098
Expenses
$19,853
Assets
$531,862
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support the Union Cemetery of Whitemarsh.

What it reported doing in 2018

Contributions to the Union Cemetery of Whitemarsh.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 31
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 42.4%; rating input score 42
  • Program expense ratio: 23.6%; rating input score 24
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 79.8%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 26.79; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 33%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 112.3% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.5% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 42.4% of revenue deployed · 23.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 1 board members independent · 1 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $7K · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 42/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 24/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.