Community Care Development Network
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 810955665
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2018
- Location
- Center Point, AL, USA
- Phone
- 2057775894
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community, Neighborhood Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $516,199
- Expenses
- $531,524
- Assets
- $363,732
- Liabilities
- $238,828
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Tamika D Holmes (Chief Executive Officer Director)
- Reba Williams (Vice President)
- Anthony Porter (President)
People named in this filing
- LonTrenia Cook (Advisory-Parent)
- Kintisha Matthews (Advisory board)
- Devin Gary (Advisor)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Community Care Development Network exists to develop, transform, and restore life to families, adults, teens, and community to be committed, unified, and mature.Empowering and influencing people to own their potential and create an opportunity for themselves.
What it reported doing in 2024
EDUCATION SERVICES CCDN has several educational resources to help the community, inclusive of the following: Inspire Education Academy - A unique education experience for nontraditional students. Students receive life development, job skills, job connection, GED or high school Credit Recovery, and more. Inspire Education Services - This is a service for youth and adults who desire to attend a trade school, community college, or a training program but do not know how to get started. Services include enrollment assistance, financial aid application assistance, and education research services. Literacy Resources - Resource connection for reading and math. This service is for those who struggle in these areas. Through partner relationships, CCDN can provide referrals to partner programs to help strengthen reading and math skills.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 79% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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 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: 52
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 33
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 58.9%; rating input score 59
- Program expense ratio: 57.2%; rating input score 57
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- 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: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -3%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.68; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.66; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 33% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 31.3% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 33.5% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 58.9% of revenue deployed · 57.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $304K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 27 of 29 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D expense reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.