Center for Social-Emotional Learning

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472093422
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Cincinnati, OH, USA
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Reported finances

Revenue
$100,896
Expenses
$101,610
Assets
$93,207

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Robert Kelly (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Louise Gomer Bangel (Board Member)
  • Barbara Gray (Board Member)
  • Clarice Warner (Board Member)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Teaching social emotional -- problem-solving -- and peer mediation skills to students and other youth in the Greater Cincinnati area

What it reported doing in 2025

Part and Line Number: Part III - Line 29 Taught Social-Emotional Learning concepts for 7 eighth grade classes in 17 sessions to a total of 150 students and 2 teachers; and 5 sixth grade classes in 15 sessions to a total of 110 students and 4 teachers staff. Students were predominantly minority and from low-middle SES class families. Students and teachers rated the CSEL program as 78-100% effective on surveys

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 82% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.5%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 87.7%; rating input score 88

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.7%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.92; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.2% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.5% of revenue deployed · 87.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $89K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.