Christmas for Kids Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 621452512
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023
- Location
- Hendersonville, TN, USA
- Phone
- 6158227084
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Gift Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $267,949
- Expenses
- $191,396
- Assets
- $328,951
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- LINDA O'CONNELL (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- LINDA O'CONNELL (PRESIDENT): $36,059 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Christmas 4 kids (a division of christmas for kids, inc.) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization dedicated to helping needy children experience the joys of christmas.
What it reported doing in 2025
Each year, 450-500 underprivileged children and teens, grades 1 through 8, are selected by their school teachers, school counselors and/or principals in sumner, wilson and other counties to participate in the christmas shopping event. Each child is given an allowance to spend at the local walmart. Each child has an adult supervisor to help shop and also verify the amount of money spent so they do not exceed their allowance. Grades 7 and 8 meet at a designated meeting area and are taken by donated buses to the walmart to shop with an adult. This shopping occured on a designated sunday in december. The following tuesday, entertainers donated the use of their tour buses and the drivers donated their time to pick up the children in grades 1 through 6 at their various schools. All children were taken to a local establishment for food and entertainment by the drivers and some entertainers, who also donated their time. Later, all children were taken to the walmart to shop. As the buses pull into the parking area, the volunteers are then sent to the buses to meet a child for the shopping experience of their young life. In addition, each child receives a brand new winter coat. After the shopping trip, the children were taken back to their respective schools by the same bus and driver. Once there, the children were picked up by their parents or guardian(s). The children leave with wonderful thoughts about a great day that was all their own.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 76% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 69% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 65
- Transparency & Controls: 88
- Accountability: 62
- Sustainability: 65
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 60.6%; rating input score 61
- Program expense ratio: 83.2%; rating input score 83
- Fundraising efficiency: $7.48 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 95.6%; rating input score 96; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 28.6%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.72; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 18.8%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 60.6% of revenue deployed · 83.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $159K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $36K · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2011 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 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.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 30/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.