Capital Region Partnership for Career Development
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 272588987
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2014–2017
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2017
- Location
- Enola, PA, USA
- Phone
- 7177328400
- Rating
- 62
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Vocational Counseling
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $134,575
- Expenses
- $100,032
- Assets
- $72,639
- Liabilities
- $87,879
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Susan Zehner (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Larissa Bailey (Board Member)
- Tiffanie DeVan (Director)
- Michele Myers (Director)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Capital Region Partnership for Career Development is governed by a volunteer Board of Directors in order to enhance the awareness of students in grades K through 12 in pulbic school districtts and private schools within Dauphin, Cumberland, Perry, York and Lebanon Counties, Pennsylvania as to post-secondary education, training and career options and opportunities.
What it reported doing in 2017
The Capital Region Partnership for Career Development direclty hosted and/or coordinated with other organizaton programs serving students to help enhance career awareness and provide opportunities for career exploration. In addition, the partnership held meetings and events for educators to provide them with resources and on-site experiences to utilize in their schools to benefit students' understandings of career paths and possibilities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 46
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 63
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 40.9%; rating input score 41
- Program expense ratio: 55%; rating input score 55
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 25.7%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.73; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.21; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -14.6% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 16.5% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 29.5% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 40.9% of revenue deployed · 55% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $55K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2014 to 2017
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 41/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.