Advocacy Institute Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
050527118
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016, Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Charlotte, NC, USA
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$170,622
Expenses
$144,938
Assets
$42,309
Liabilities
$4,625

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

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DEBORAH A WHITFIELD (CEO)

People named in this filing

  • DEBORAH A WHITFIELD (CEO)
  • BRENDA C ARMSTRONG (COO)

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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Advocacy institute, inc's purpose is to create community inclusive opportunities for children with disabilities and training for their families.

What it reported doing in 2016

Advocacy institute, inc., ("aii") provides community-inclusive opportunities for individuals with disabilities and their families. To this end, aii realized the following achievements during fiscal year 2012: delivered trainings on non-profit formation and tax-exemption in charlotte for 10 individuals. Provided consultative services to local charlotte church on non-profit formation and tax-exemption. Delivered leadership and disability advocacy training to 42individuals who are either parents of individuals with developmental disabilities, or self-advocates (adults with developmental disabilities) as a contractor to the nc council on developmental disabilities. Aii conducted the 8-weekend session trainings in raleigh, nc at the sheraton hotel. Guest presenters were brought in who provided experiential-learning on various topics including: the history of disability; inclusive-education; government-funded services; self-determination; boards/commissions and parliamentary procedure; state and federal legislative process; housing; employment; effective use of the media. Participants also delivered mock-testimony at the state legislative building. Conducted 2 regional trainings to graduates of the training program in asheville and raleigh, nc. Traveled extensively to asheville to support parents and self-advocates to remain engaged in disability advocacy. Developed marketing materials for external distribution concerning aii's collaborative project with the nccdd. Worked on improved internal, administrative systems-file storage and retrieval, staffing, added accounting service support, reporting, policies and procedures, training recruitment systems. Worked on improved external, administrative systems-new and improved website. Collaborated with consulting firm, legacy partners, llc, to improve training outcomes, and participant follow-up systems. Hosted several board-related functions to recruit new board members and engage existing members.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 100% 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

SUPPORTED - 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: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.9%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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; 63rd 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: 15.1%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.29; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -12.1% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 42.2% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.9% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 2 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $145K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2014 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.