Children's Protective Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
630318657
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Montgomery, AL, USA
Phone
3342650784
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Homes for Children & Adolescents

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,312,405
Expenses
$1,491,408
Assets
$1,184,283
Liabilities
$103,634

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SO JUAN N CRENSHAW (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • GERALD JONES (EXECUTIVE DI): $84,351 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Serving youth through a caring, therapeutic environment where hurts are healed; hope is nurtured.

What it reported doing in 2024

Finding a need for a more specialized educational program for our children, brantwood began educating our youth on-site in the mid 1990's thanks to a donation from the kiwanis club of montgomery, which was used to build our school building. The brantwood on-site educational program or bosep, as it is commonly called, allows children a safe place to learn at their own levels. Having a lower student to teacher ratio allows us to account for the individual aptitudes, interests and challenges of our children while striving to re-shape our children's attitude towards education.

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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.5%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 85.5%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.7 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

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: 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -13.6%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.7%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.4% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.5% of revenue deployed · 85.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $84K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 44/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.