Canton Country Day School

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
340938702
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Canton, OH, USA
Phone
3304538279
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Primary, Elementary Schools

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,124,545
Expenses
$2,872,568
Assets
$4,436,737
Liabilities
$313,020

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KAREN QUINLAN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • PATRICK G ATER (HEAD OF SCHOOL): $103,499 total reported compensation
  • DEEDEE AMENTAS (BUSINESS MANAGER): $33,490 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

At canton county day school, students are empowered to recognize and optimize their full potential by cultivating an environment that prepares them to meet the challenges in a rapidly changing world with openness, enthusiasm, a willingness to problem solve, while developing respect for individual differences and community values.

What it reported doing in 2024

Canton country day school was founded in 1964 as an independent, co-educational, non-profit elementary school, providing an innovative alternative to local public and parochial schools. It has provided leadership in many educational areas throughout its history, and today, country day is known and respected for its challenging curriculum, creative use of learning opportunities and excellent education. The school currently serves students in grades pre-kindergarten through eight. Our families represent a range of ethnic, cultural, racial and socio-economic diversity, and reside in communities throughout stark and southern summit counties. Financial aid is available.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 68% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 89% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 68.9%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.43 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -35.2%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.54; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.8%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.2% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 68.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $103K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 55/100.