Communities in Schools of Richmond County North Carolina

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
452638001
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2014
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2014, Form 990-N 2012
Location
Raleigh, NC, USA
Phone
9198322700
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Reported finances

Revenue
$21,400
Expenses
$38,564
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Marchell Adams-David (Board Chair)
  • Michelle Parrish (Vice Chair)
  • Emily Tucker (Treasurer)

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 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

CISs mission is to surround students with a community of support, empowering them to stay in school and achieve in life.

What it reported doing in 2014

The organization worked in partnership with the public schools of Richmond County, North Carolina. By bringing caring adults into the schools to address childrens unmet needs, CIS provides the link between educators and the community. The result: teachers are free to teach, and students many in jeopardy of dropping out have the opportunity to focus on learning.In June 2015, CIS terminated its operations and transferred a small fund balance of $356 to the local United Way agency.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 96
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 5
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 88.6%; rating input score 89

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: -80.2%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 43.6%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -35.1% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -73.4% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -200% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 88.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $34K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2013 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.