Aadd Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
580641496
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Decatur, GA, USA
Phone
4048819777
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Developmentally Disabled Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,187,781
Expenses
$4,265,976
Assets
$4,318,040
Liabilities
$100,504

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATHRYN S KEELEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • WAYNE MCMILLAN (INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KATHRYN S KEELEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $174,155 total reported compensation
  • WAYNE MCMILLAN (INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $33,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Aadd maximizes resources for individuals and families living with intellectual and developmental disabilities to pursue stability, growth and independence.

What it reported doing in 2016

Outreach services: aadd's outreach services are a direct support system for individuals and families living with an intellectual/developmental disability. Outreach specialists assist each participating family in identifying needs and preferences for services such as health care support, education, housing, transportation, budgeting, literacy skills development, employment training and job referral services and then develops a customized individualized family support plan (ifsp). We also identify and address circumstances in the home and family environment that may impact the individual and family stability. The goal of outreach services is to help maintain a cohesive family unit and to assist the individual to live at home in the community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 85% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.3%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 81.5%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.34 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99%; rating input score 99; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.9%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.01; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.9%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.4% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.3% of revenue deployed · 81.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $174K · 19 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $333K reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 37 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2013 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 47/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.