Am 4 Youth Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
800700641
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2016
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Indianapolis, IN, USA
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Job Training

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,610
Expenses
$11,216
Assets
$580

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

People named in this filing

  • JONATHAN THOMPSON (EXECUTIVE DI)
  • BRYAN ROHRER (BOARD MEMBER)
  • LEE ELLIS (BOARD 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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of am 4 youth9arts motivation for youth) is to improve the quality of life and education for youth by incorporating the arts into their daily lives and to esteem and empower them to raise their levels of confidence, develop problem solving skills, imaginative thinking, group interaction, self-awareness, higher academic standards and social activity by using workshops, camps and assembly programs.

What it reported doing in 2016

The theater program provides an opportunity for children from preschool to 9th grade to learn theater techniques. The program also helps develop higher academic standards, conflict resolution, and life skills. Approximately 650 children benefit from the theater program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 97% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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. 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: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.4%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 49.6%; rating input score 50

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.7%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.05; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.9% per year; rating input score 0; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -13.9% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.4% of revenue deployed · 49.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $6K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2011 to 2016
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.