Vesper

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
274332028
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
6127509538
Rating
36
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Undergraduate College (4-year)

Reported finances

Revenue
$137,438
Expenses
$134,408
Assets
$8,954
Liabilities
$780

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANIEL NOYES (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • DANIEL NOYES (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $25,601 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Graduate education ecological architectural

What it reported doing in 2015

Graduate education in ecology and architechture

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 87% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. 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: 4
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 16
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 5.3%; rating input score 5
  • Program expense ratio: 5.4%; rating input score 5
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 2.2%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.07; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 23.9% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.1% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 5.3% of revenue deployed · 5.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $26K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2011 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 5/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.