Ceed Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
271338043
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA
Phone
9548217096
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Adult, Continuing Education

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$0
Expenses
$307
Assets
$1,528

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Ruth Moller (Director)
  • Sue Hendricks (Director)
  • Becki Stewart (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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The CEED Foundation provides professional teacher training to communities where quality education is not available. This is done through a CEED Mentor Teacher Program. The program works by bringing teachers in to work and learn with local teachers. A CEED trained administrator provides guidance to teachers in methods that help students analyze issues, solve problems and create solutions for their communities. Because community families are not able to support the program CEED uses donations to help offset the costs. The CEED Foundations goal is to train local teachers on how to sustain the program within 10 years.

What it reported doing in 2015

CEED provides support for projects that teach core skills and concepts to students around the world.CEED supports these projects by providing supplies and covering teacher expenses while they donate their time teaching students.

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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 19
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: 50.2%; rating input score 50

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: Limited
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.98; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -101.2% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -120% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -12.8% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 50.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $154 in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2012 to 2015
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.