Centre Region Down Syndrome Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
260845747
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
State College, PA, USA
Phone
8143218530
Rating
50
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health

Reported finances

Revenue
$56,685
Expenses
$59,055
Assets
$33,880

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KARISSA RODGERS-HILL (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • SUZANNE WILLIAMS (VICE PRESIDE)
  • KRISTA WILKINSON (BOARD MEMBER)
  • TANYA ROBERTS (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the centre region down syndrome society (crdss)is to provide individuals with down syndrome and their families with the tools, resources and support necessary to participate in, contribute to and achieve personal fulfillment. To this end, crdss offers 1) stipends and enrichment funds, 2) educational programming, and 3) opportunities for social engagement.

What it reported doing in 2024

The centre region down syndrome society (crdss) provides resources, education, enrichment, support, community education and advocacy to individuals with down syndrome as well as raising community awareness.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 25
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 25.8%; rating input score 26
  • Program expense ratio: 24.3%; rating input score 24

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4.2%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.57; rating input score 32; 32nd 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: -6.6% per year; rating input score 0; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 25.8% of revenue deployed · 24.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $14K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 26/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 24/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.