CDI Head Start

Legal name: Community Development Institute Head Start

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841548541
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Denver, CO, US
Phone
7207475100
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Kindergarten, Preschool, Nursery School, Early Admissions

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$37,215,764
Expenses
$37,313,181
Assets
$2,174,842
Liabilities
$925,879

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARK ELLIOTT (EXEC. DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT)
  • DEBORAH SANDQUIST (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARK ELLIOTT (EXEC. DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT): $235,078 total reported compensation
  • PATRICIA PERRY (CFO/SECRETARY): $221,602 total reported compensation
  • NILA RINEHART (PROJECT DIRECTOR): $212,522 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our role is to reduce disruptions for families and staff and help communities move forward. We bring national experience and build on local strength.

What it reported doing in 2024

During the fiscal year ended june 30, 2025, cdi hs provided head start educational and childcare services to children in head start programs under interim management.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 96% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.9%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 84.7%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.3%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.06; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.43; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.7%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -10.3% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -9.8% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9.1% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 84.9% of revenue deployed · 84.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $31.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $235K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.