Andrews Gift
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 800966081
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Harrisburg, PA, USA
- Phone
- 7175719769
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alliance/Advocacy Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $238,684
- Expenses
- $239,748
- Assets
- $408,552
- Liabilities
- $137,431
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Andrew Ward (President)
Highest reported compensation
- Amanda Pendleton (Board Member): $16,280 total reported compensation
- Barb Weber (Board Member): $600 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Provide awareness, assistance, and financial support to optimize the potential of all individuals with autism within their homes, educational programs, and community settings.
What it reported doing in 2024
Andrew's Gift created a Literacy Project that focuses on students with autism improvement in the core competencies of reading, writing, and spelling with the understanding that these foundational skills support growth in all areas of the core curriculum (math, science, social studies). We work collaboratively with school staff in each of our sites to ensure that instruction in literacy is present, robust, and designed to meet the individual needs of each student. Through our efforts we are able to support 5 schools through our program, by identifying curriculum for a diverse range of learners, to support effective instructional practices in a variety of settings, and to introduce 21st Century learning tools into these specialized instructional settings. We seek to improve student motivation for learning, to ease their ability to fully participate in learning environments, and to demonstrate growth across the components of skilled reading and additional literacy skills. We plan to continue funding these grant requests in the future.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 94% of its reported program spending out as grants.
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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 82
- Transparency & Controls: 78
- Accountability: 37
- Sustainability: 39
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 92.5%; rating input score 93
- Program expense ratio: 91.8%; rating input score 92
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 57.1%; rating input score 57; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
- 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: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -0.4%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.7; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.34; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 92.5% of revenue deployed · 91.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 2 of 6 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 8 filed program accomplishments · $220K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $16K · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 57/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.