Ceressas Enrichment and Empowe Academy Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
273590155
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018, Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Oakland Park, FL, USA
Phone
9545331938
Rating
30
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Kindergarten, Preschool, Nursery School, Early Admissions

Reported finances

Revenue
$200,601
Expenses
$219,117
Assets
$-18,516
Liabilities
$-18,516

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LINDA E HARRIS (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • LAKIELA G (HARRIS): $25,280 total reported compensation
  • LINDA E HARRIS (PRESIDENT): $19,600 total reported compensation
  • EMMA M (THOMAS): $18,137 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization operates a daycare center for children whose mothers are unemployed or are at low income level.

What it reported doing in 2018

Theorganization operates only one program- a daycare service for under

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9.2%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: -0.08; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 44.9%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 15.3% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -107.8% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 0 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $213K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $25K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 10 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.