Anabel Huling Early Learning Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
371167320
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Rantoul, IL, USA
Phone
2178924445
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Child Day Care

Reported finances

Revenue
$692,581
Expenses
$708,539
Assets
$28,866
Liabilities
$55,529

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • SANDRA BURDETTE (CO-PRES/DIRECTOR): $39,640 total reported compensation
  • KIMBERLY CLENDANIEL (CIRECTOR/SADMINISTRATOR): $35,051 total reported compensation
  • KRISTINE MARTIN (CO-PRES/DIRECTOR): $16,518 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Daycare, preschool and after

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 64% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 92
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 90.9%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $105.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 11th 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: 55.6%; rating input score 56; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.3%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.04; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.92; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.9%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93% of revenue deployed · 90.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $644K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $40K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 28 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 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.

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: Independent voting board scored 56/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D expense reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.