Vhs Public Benefit Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
831702476
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Vicksburg, MS, USA
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$368,125
Expenses
$364,674
Assets
$5,201
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • SHAROLYN MILLER (NON DESIGNATED DIRECTOR)
  • CASEY FISHER (NON DESIGNATED DIRECTOR)
  • KIM GERMANY (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Organized to benefit the vicksburg warren school district by utilizing private and public funding sources to erect or maintain public buildings to be used in the school district.

What it reported doing in 2020

Construction and improvements to new and existing buildings

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 77% for direct work, and 23% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.1%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.9%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.01; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -45.1% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -45.2% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -72.8% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.1% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $365K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2018 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.