Visible Men Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264436216
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2013
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2013, Form 990-N 2012
Location
Sarasota, FL, USA
Phone
9417577444
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$59,324
Expenses
$58,437
Assets
$1,167
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Neil Phillips (President)

People named in this filing

  • Neil Phillips (President)
  • Laura McGiffert Slover (Secretary & Treasurer)
  • Scott Brickman (Board Member)

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

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To develop a network and forum for African-American males to highlight and make visible their accomplishments so that they can be role models for the youth

What it reported doing in 2013

Visible Men Hosted Monthly Saturday Success Role Model classes for this K-2 start up charter school from 9-12am at the School in Bradenton Florida. Visible Men also hosted after school mentoring programs on a weekly basis for k-2 students through the collaboration of Visible Men and Community partners using Arts, Athletics and Academic tutoring focus.Student Participants: 65 students at VMA served for 10 months.Average 35 students per month at Saturday SuccessAverage 55 students per week served at After School Program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 36
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 36.1%; rating input score 36
  • Program expense ratio: 36.6%; rating input score 37

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.5%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.02; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -71.9% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -31.4% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -95.6% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 36.1% of revenue deployed · 36.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $21K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2011 to 2013
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.