Cedar Branch Developmental Achievement Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411311051
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Owatonna, MN, USA
Phone
5074400796
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Developmentally Disabled Centers

Reported finances

Revenue
$46
Expenses
$13,231
Assets
$104,508
Liabilities
$1,046

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GEORGE PERCIVAL (PRESIDENT)
  • ANISSA JONES (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • STEVE THORSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • GEORGE PERCIVAL (PRESIDENT)
  • ANISSA JONES (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • SHIRLEY MORGAN (SECRETARY/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. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide day treatment and habilitation services to persons living in mower county, Minnesota who are mentally disabled, brain injured or related condition. Teaching work skills and life skills using occupational and physical therapy. The organization is in process of closing non-profit due to covid related difficulties. No longer provided day treatment or habilitation services during 2024 or 2025.

What it reported doing in 2025

Due to covid related issues, cedar branch developmental achievement center did not serve any clients in 2024 or 2025. The Minnesota 245d license has not been renewed, and the organization is in the process of closing at this time.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 27.2%; rating input score 27
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -28,663%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.9; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -15.4% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -12.2% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9.5% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 27.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • 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: Program expense ratio scored 27/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • 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 22/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.