Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 710492205
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Little Rock, AR, USA
- Phone
- 5013719678
- Rating
- 70
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alliance/Advocacy
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,940,529
- Expenses
- $2,398,299
- Assets
- $3,633,503
- Liabilities
- $218,402
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
25 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- XOCHITL DELGADO SOLORZANO (PRESIDENT)
- NIKKI EDGE (VICE PRESIDENT)
- KEESA SMITH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- KEESA SMITH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $173,770 total reported compensation
- JENNIFER KEITH FERGUSON (DEPUTY DIRECTOR): $138,067 total reported compensation
- CHRISTIN HARPER (EMPLOYEE): $130,096 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Advocating for the development and implementation of data-driven public policy that improves child well-being in Arkansas, with a focus on economic security, education, health, early childhood, child welfare, juvenile justice, and racial equity.
What it reported doing in 2025
The organization researches issues, provides timely and accurate information to policy-makers, state agencies, the media and the public, and makes policy recommendations on behalf of Arkansas children.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 59
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 54
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 58.7%; rating input score 59
- Program expense ratio: 70.1%; rating input score 70
- Fundraising efficiency: $6.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 18.4%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.52; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 32.7%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 58.7% of revenue deployed · 70.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $174K · 25 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.