West Point Visitor Center & Depot

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264571883
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2011
Forms available
Form 990 2011
Location
West Point, GA, USA
Phone
7066456218
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
History Museums

Reported finances

Revenue
$148,242
Expenses
$75,739
Assets
$650,617
Liabilities
$168,484

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The depot exists solely to stimulate tourism and advance the general welfare of the city of west point. The depot provides a place of historical significance for public and private gatherings for the city of west point community and visitors.

What it reported doing in 2011

Provide a place of historical significance for public and private gatherings for the city of west point

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 84% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 60th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 48.9%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.59; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -90.5% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $76K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2010 to 2011
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.