Van Alstyne Cemetery Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
750863320
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2021
Forms available
Form 990 2021, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Van Alstyne, TX, USA
Phone
9034825234
Rating
43
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$38,870
Expenses
$81,879
Assets
$464,504
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TOMMY SCOGGINS (DIRECTOR & PRESIDENT)
  • BENNY EDWARDS (DIRECTOR & VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ZACK HERRING (DIRECTOR & SEXTON): $12,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The association maintained the cemetery during 2021, performing all repairs and daily maintenance required.

What it reported doing in 2021

The van alstyne cemetery association maintains the van alstyne cemetery on a daily basis by performing all repairs and maintenance.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 66% 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 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: 9
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 11.8%; rating input score 12
  • Program expense ratio: 5.6%; rating input score 6
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 6th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -110.6%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.67; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.7%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -48.9% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.3% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 11.8% of revenue deployed · 5.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $12K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 18 current checks pass · 6 findings to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2016 to 2021
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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 12/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX DepreciationDepletion column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesAccounting column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherSalariesAndWages column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PayrollTaxes column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.