Veiled Prophets of St Louis Ltd

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
430565060
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
St Louis, MO, USA
Phone
3148808134
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,172,470
Expenses
$1,924,686
Assets
$1,042,137
Liabilities
$360,315

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID G PLUFKA (ASST. VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JAMES JOHNSON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • R WINTHROP REED III (PRESIDENT)
  • RICHARD NIX (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JAMES H HOWE IV (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (UNTIL 12.31.24))

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMES H HOWE IV (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (UNTIL 12.31.24)): $168,222 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization works to promote the metropolitan st. Louis area and improve the cooperation between civic and community leaders

What it reported doing in 2024

Vp ball is a formal gala for introducing young ladies to the st. Louis metropolitan community which promotes goodwill and cooperation between civic and community leaders. Approximately 40 women are chosen for their outstanding community service and presented in front of friends and family for their contributions. The annual event is formal dress and includes a pageant, reception supper and early morning breakfast.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 74% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.7%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 66.1%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.4%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.54; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.35; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.7%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.8% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58.7% of revenue deployed · 66.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $168K · 7 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $530K reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.