Connections to Independence

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
800542940
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
6123542437
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,244,555
Expenses
$1,970,897
Assets
$1,015,234
Liabilities
$216,600

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JESSICA ROGERS (EXECUTIVE DI): $85,980 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide unique programming and advocacy for foster care youth, ages 14- 24, to promote a successful transition to living independently as they reach adulthood.

What it reported doing in 2024

Connections to independence creates a seamless network of support among the individuals and systems involved in the youth's life, including county social workers, permanent placement providers, teachers, counselors, therapists and other community partners. Through consistent communication with the network of support, involved parties are able to create detailed and individualized goals and plans and additionally ensure that both youth and adults follow through on plans. Connections to independence focuses on creating and maintaining strong and healthy relationships between the youth and supportive adults through a healthy mind, body, and soul philosophy and teachings. Our goal is to provide youth with the necessary skills and tools that will enable foster youth to transition into successful independent living when they age out of care. Through a combination of direct client services, structured programming, and experiential learning youth are able to develop fundamental life skills and be connected to a community organization committed to their continued development and success. Latest statistics: 90% of participants, aged 14-19 are enrolled in school. 78% of participants in the 21-24 age groups have maintained employment since emancipation and 100% remained in stable housing.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.5%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 77.8%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.24 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12.2%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.52; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.4%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.5% of revenue deployed · 77.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $86K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.