Center for Educational Programming

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
260481593
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2019
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2019, Form 990-N 2018
Location
Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Phone
8019150568
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Ethnic, Immigrant Centers

Reported finances

Revenue
$2
Expenses
$5,516
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • MICHAEL ARNOW (DIRECTOR)
  • GERALD LAZAR MD (DIRECTOR)
  • FRANCES MORSE PHD (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 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the organization is twofold: first, to provide educational materials for immigrants and refugees to help them become productive, healthly and law-abiding members of our society. Second, to provide educational materials to the general public to promote tolerance, peaceful conflict resolution, and nonviolence in a variety of arenas, including family relations, inter-racial relations, and international relations.

What it reported doing in 2019

The organization has filed dissolution papers with the state of Utah and has officially wound down by the end of 2019.

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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 92
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 7
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 77.8%; rating input score 78

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -275,700%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -10.3% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -22.2% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -22.2% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 77.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2010 to 2019
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.