Columbus Literate Community Program

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
581929221
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Columbus, GA, USA
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$52,629
Expenses
$48,635
Assets
$13,921
Liabilities
$13,915

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

People named in this filing

  • BRANDY TOLBERT (DIRECTOR)
  • DAVID BOYCE (IT)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Community literacy development

What it reported doing in 2025

Conducted family literacy project and kindergarden redi ess for kids conducted adult literacy program to help a dult learning

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 96% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 37
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 35.5%; rating input score 36
  • Program expense ratio: 38.5%; rating input score 38

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.6%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.29; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 69%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -18.6% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.7% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9.7% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 35.5% of revenue deployed · 38.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $19K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 7 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 38/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part I part ii net assets crosscheck did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.