Wesley Foundation at Texas Tech

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
475551283
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lubbock, TX, USA
Phone
8067628749
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$713,014
Expenses
$667,121
Assets
$893,691
Liabilities
$20,944

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Zack Esgar (Board President)

People named in this filing

  • Levi Siebenlist (Director)
  • Caitlin Marcotte (Director)
  • Danny Sanders (Trustee)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Wesley Foundation at Texas Tech is a non-profit campus ministry dedicated to raising up generations of dynamic Christians through missions internships community outreach and religious study classes and training.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Wesley is very intentional about developing leaders through its discipleship program. The Wesley has a student leadership team where regular mentorship serving experience and leadership opportunities are provided for students. The student leadership program is based on experiential learning where students are provided with regular opportunities to lead and serve others. The student leadership team goes on two retreats each year to help plan future Fall and Spring Semesters and connect with each other. The student leadership team overseas these areas of ministry at the Wesley: worship outreach community events intramurals spiritual formation and media. This program enriches the college experience of our students and helps them develop spiritually mentally and physically while learning how to serve and lead others. It also gives about 25 students per year an opportunity to discover if they may be called to full-time ministry.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% 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 and most voting board members are independent. 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: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 50.8%; rating input score 51
  • Program expense ratio: 54.2%; rating input score 54
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1,056.02 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: 6.4%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.34; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 50.8% of revenue deployed · 54.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $362K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 43 of 44 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 51/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.