West Bartow Front Porch Revitalization Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
010662412
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Bartow, FL, USA
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$26,762
Expenses
$26,957
Assets
$36,331
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

People named in this filing

  • RUFUS STEPHENS (CHAIRPERSON)
  • JOHNNIE FERGUNSON (Fundraising Chairperson)
  • Marilyn Watkins (Council 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. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote and carry out community and economic revitalization activities in polk county. Our mission is to empower people and enrich lives throughpositive community and economic services.

What it reported doing in 2015

1.more than 24 volunter participated in keep polk county beautiful; great american clean up.2.partner with djj & polk county sheriff to develop a mentoring program for youth offenders.3. Dcf renewed partnership agreement for the access Florida progran. An estimate 4900 person applied for some type of assistance,(housing, emergency, medical, financial, food stamps, etc.)4.7700 persons utilized computers and internet service for job search etc.5. Supervision of more than 49 adult and student volunteers, completed over 1300 community service hours.6. Assitance for coummty HIV outreach - 1400 people.7. Provided housing refferals for 700 people: certification training.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 72% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

STRONG - 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: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: -0.7%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.35; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -36.8% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -34.8% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.6% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $27K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.