Capital Region Workforce Development Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200247805
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2009–2013
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Albany, NY, USA
Phone
5184520404
Rating
35
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Job Training

Reported finances

Revenue
$10
Expenses
$71
Assets
$3,174
Liabilities
$591

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATHLEEN SCALES (PRESIDENT)
  • SHANA DAVIS (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KATHLEEN SCALES (PRESIDENT)
  • SHANA DAVIS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MARY SULLIVAN (TREASURER)

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 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the capital region workforce development center is to build and sustain long term strategic partnerships between the capital region's area labor unions and community organizations.

What it reported doing in 2013

The capital region workforce development center sponsored job skills training programs for workers affiliated with capital region area labor unions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -610%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 44.7; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -57.6% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -47.7% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -15.8% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2009 to 2013
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.