Apple Playschools

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
465404037
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Phone
7349759104
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Child Day Care

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,129,859
Expenses
$2,235,349
Assets
$928,887
Liabilities
$962,151

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ETTA HEISLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JEFF WILKERSON (PRESIDENT)
  • SAMUEL KACHUCK (FAMILY REPRESENTATIVE, TREASURER, & PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ETTA HEISLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $76,101 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We embody inclusion, innovation, and environmental stewardship in entrepreneurship and education in order to make a more equitable world. We do this through anti-bias education, global citizenship, environmental stewardship & education, collaborative community partnerships, & respect for authentic childhood.

What it reported doing in 2024

Apple playschools offers two unique early education programs: green apple garden playschool, which emphasizes outdoor and nature play year round, and manzanitas spanish immersion playschool, where children are immersed in hispanic language and culture in order to develop fluency in the spanish language. Both programs share a love of child-led, play-based learning where children are encouraged to follow their own interest at their own pace. We also provide a community-immersion school age camp program that promotes play and independence, as well as workshops for educators, families, and caregivers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 88% 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

STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.1%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 83%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $36.7 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -5%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.42; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.04; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.4%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.1% of revenue deployed · 83% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $76K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.