Child Care Answers of Central Indiana

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
844767288
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Indianapolis, IN, USA
Phone
3176365727
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Children's, Youth Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,540,733
Expenses
$1,993,460
Assets
$1,540,221
Liabilities
$54,488

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MOLLIE SMITH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MOLLIE SMITH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $122,209 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To improve the well-being, care and education for the whole child.

What it reported doing in 2024

Cca helps educate families on what to look for in child care and provides general parenting support. Cca helps families find creative solutions to child care challenges regarding cost and availability. Cca also offers resources to those planning to open a child care business and those currently in the early childhood profession. Partnering with local organizations and businesses, cca communicates the benefits of early care and education and the challenges associated with families' lack of access to care.cca also helps employers find quality child care through onsite services, online searchers, email, or phone. Guidance is provided on what to look for in a program and support with decisions on which program best fits their needs. Human resources and leadership are supported as they refine work-life policies and total rewards programs. Cca tracks data on how child care trends affect businesses to identify gaps and solutions.the services offered by cca are free and available to anyone who lives or works in hamilton, hendricks, or marion counties. If someone does not reside or work within those counties, specialists can connect you to the local agency that could assist.

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 82% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.1%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 82.7%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.81 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 97.3%; rating input score 97; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 21.5%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.77; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.1%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 21.3% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 20.8% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 29.1% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65.1% of revenue deployed · 82.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $122K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 33 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 11 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.