City of Hope Child Development Center
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 582610689
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2014
- Forms available
- Form 990 2014
- Location
- Norcross, GA, USA
- Phone
- 7704485475
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community, Neighborhood Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $252,601
- Expenses
- $254,068
- Assets
- $63,877
- Liabilities
- $186,410
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- WILLIAM SHEALS (CEO)
People named in this filing
- REGINA SMITH (Director)
- DENNIS GRANT (Director)
- PERCY SCOTT (Director)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To Operate a Daycare Facility
What it reported doing in 2014
Operate a daycare facility with prices that are lower than the average market price.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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
STRONG - 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 89
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Accountability: 76
- Sustainability: 23
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 43
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Limited
- Other executive compensation review process: Limited
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -0.6%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.92; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: Limited
Growth
- Program expense growth: -78.1% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -18.8% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $254K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2014
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 2 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.