Cornelia Elementary Pto
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 416038322
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Edina, MN, USA
- Phone
- 9528484600
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Parent/Teacher Group
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $95,917
- Expenses
- $79,404
- Assets
- $64,130
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ALECIA SMITH (CO-PRESIDENT)
- LENA EASTMAN (CO-PRESIDENT)
- SARAH NGUYEN (CO-PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- ADAM MAYFIELD (TREASURER)
- ALECIA SMITH (CO-PRESIDENT)
- KRISTI MATELSKI (VOLUNTEER COORDINATOR)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The purpose of the cornelia parent teacher organization (pto) is to support and enhance the educational programs at cornelia elementary in edina, mn and to strengthen the relationships between home and school.
What it reported doing in 2024
Classroom and teacher support - cornelia pto provided a reimbursement allowance of $250 for each full time teacher and $125 for each part time teacher. This allows the teacher to purchase educational materials, recognition awards, technology supplies and other materials to enrich the educational experience of our students.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 66% for direct work, and 34% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 60
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 78.9%; rating input score 79
- Program expense ratio: 95.3%; rating input score 95
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 17.2%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.81; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -2.4% per year; rating input score 0; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 78.9% of revenue deployed · 95.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $76K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.