Club Esteem Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
593317831
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Melbourne, FL, USA
Phone
3214098942
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$456,403
Expenses
$466,032
Assets
$435,177
Liabilities
$782

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RYAN MAULTSBY (PRESIDENT)
  • ELLENA LITTLE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ELLENA LITTLE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $81,663 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Club esteem's mission is to inspire youth from economically disadvantaged communities to embrace the highest standards of academic and personal excellence - instilling in each child a desire to learn, to serve, and to accept challenges. Our goal is to promote active partnerships involving youth, parents, and community, in order to create opportunities that will break the cycle of poverty and enable club esteem children to develop into productive, vision-driven adults. Club esteem focuses on partnerships and measurable success outcomes and aims to serve as a model agency for children enrichment programs throughout the united states.

What it reported doing in 2024

Club esteem is committed to helping children and their families reach their highest potential, obtain real and lasting success, and create meaningful change in their community. Club esteem programs are designed to enhance academic achievement, promote positive self esteem, and increase social and personal development skills.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 72% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.7%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 74.6%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $19.14 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: -2.1%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.93; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.5%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.4% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.7% of revenue deployed · 74.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $348K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $82K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.