CAYL Institute Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264529723
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2021
Location
Milton, MA, USA
Phone
6173543820
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,572,792
Expenses
$3,438,154
Assets
$871,847
Liabilities
$312,089

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Valora Washington (Chief Executive Director)
  • Corrine Corso (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Valora Washington (Chief Executive Director): $174,365 total reported compensation
  • Brenda Gadson (Chief Operating Officer): $130,000 total reported compensation
  • Wayne Ysaguirre (Chief Workforce Innovation Officer): $128,546 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Leadership programs that identify and support mid-career, early childhood leaders in the United States who demonstrate both commitment and experience working within communities of color, and/or economically underserved.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Good Jobs Metro Boston Coalition Sectoral Partnership is leading the charge for a workforce pipeline system that meets the recruitment, compensatio, education, and retention needs of the child care workforce.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 99% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 - 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.5%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 88.8%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • 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: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.8%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.36; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.6%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 21.9% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.5% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.5% of revenue deployed · 88.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $174K · 9 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.6M reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.