Childhood Literacy Advocate Group Incorporated

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
921414238
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Brooklyn, NY, USA
Phone
8605394537
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,864
Expenses
$12,105
Assets
$2,864

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHERRE FOX MATRAS (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MICHERRE FOX MATRAS (PRESIDENT)
  • GIULIO GALLAROTTI (TREASURER)
  • MEHUL PATEL (SECRETARY)

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

To bring education to more people in hopes of making the world function as properly as possible, one student at a time.

What it reported doing in 2024

Establishefd a school system in afghanistan to help access to education. Starting with one school and growing to over 8 assisting over 100 children attending. At various times pushes have been made to teach older girls (over 12 years since they are not allowed to go to school). We also assisted housewives who are looking to improve literacy skills. Currently funding a local libraby in a small town bamiyan.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Transfer-based 990-EZ. The 990-EZ reports grants or member benefits, but it does not separate enough spending to show the nonprofit’s full delivery mix.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filed totals do not add up and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -322.7%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.24; rating input score 18; 18th 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: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -100.1% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 4 of 5 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part I part ii net assets crosscheck did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.