Common Ground Community Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
452403704
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Owings Mills, MD, USA
Phone
4104840130
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Protestant
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$247,503
Expenses
$302,616
Assets
$108,365
Liabilities
$143,800

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • KELLY POLYAKOV (DIRECTOR): $38,500 total reported compensation
  • BRITTANY WILLIAMS (DIRECTOR): $30,000 total reported compensation
  • MICHELLE FEWER (DIRECTOR): $24,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Common Ground Community Center is a member-driven organization. We are a diverse and vibrant community of students, parents, teachers, and friends who are changing the face of homeschooling.is not affiliated with any homeschool group and is open to all homeschoolers.

What it reported doing in 2020

Our Baltimore Homeschool Community Center program provides educational and social opportunities for homedchooling families. Many of these families turned to homeschooling because they were unable to find and or afford an educational institution that could accomodate their childs learning style, cultural orientation, special talents or interests, and or social needs. Since its founding, its members have increased 5 fold to approximately 100 families, and the variety programs it offers has expanded greatly. These programs include classes in all the major academic subjects, clubs, social and cultural events and humanitarian activities. Our MD Homeschool Reviews program is an education ministry registered with the MD State Dept of Education to supervise home instruction under regulation .05 of the home instruction regulations, COMAR 13A.10.01 home instruction. It is an organization dedicated to creating and maintaining a safe and nurturing environment while offering support, information and resources to families who choose to educate their children at home. It serves 50 families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 81% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 38
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 12
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 46.2%; rating input score 46
  • Program expense ratio: 37.8%; rating input score 38
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 72.7%; rating input score 73; 0th 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -22.3%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.36; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.33; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.6%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 46.2% of revenue deployed · 37.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $38K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 22 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2014 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 46/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX AllOtherExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.