Volunteer Houston

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237382611
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Houston, TX, USA
Phone
2816561533
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Voluntarism Promotion

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$659,022
Expenses
$725,848
Assets
$137,005
Liabilities
$37,459

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN GUALY (PRESIDENT)
  • CAMERON WALDNER (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • CAMERON WALDNER (CEO): $100,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To effectively engage people and resources in volunteering and service.

What it reported doing in 2016

Lead program: this program nurtures youth of diverse backgrounds by developing them into high achievers and servant leaders. The program areas target the next generation of volunteers and puts them on a path of service and success. Our three main projects are: exxonmobil community summer jobs program - since 1997, exxonmobil has provided paid internships to college undergraduates to work for houston area nonprofits during the summer thus impacting 70 nonprofits. Shell summer internship program - since 2006, shell oil has provided paid internships to college undergraduates to work for houston area nonprofits during the summer thus impacting 40 nonprofits. Teens in service - since 2010, teens in service has provided service and leadership opportunities for local area high schools during the summer months.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 64% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 74% for direct work, and 26% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.6%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 81.4%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.23 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: -10.1%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.19; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.8%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.6% of revenue deployed · 81.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $591K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $100K · 19 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2012 to 2016
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 25/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.