Creche Child Care Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
470379832
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2012, Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Omaha, NE, USA
Phone
4022908422
Rating
40
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Child Day Care

Reported finances

Revenue
$17
Expenses
$505,351
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jason Lebsack (Past President)
  • Sheila Wrobel (President)

People named in this filing

  • Brian Williams (Board Member)
  • Emily Miller (Board Member)
  • Jason Lebsack (Past President)

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

Creche Childcare Center was a nonprofit, charitable and education organization providing child day-care services to residents of Omaha, Nebraska. The Board determined that it was no longer economically viable to operate as a child care center in the spring of 2013 due to sustained operating losses due to declining enrollment. Childcare operations ceased 6/28/2013. The building was put up for sale and purchased by the Montesorri Parents Coop for Children (later renamed to Montesorri Coop School) in the fall of 2013. The Board explored avenues for donating the remaining assets to another non-profit agency with similar values and intentions and a final decision was made in CY2014 to provide our remaining assets to the Omaha Community Foundation and terminate our nonprofit organization.

What it reported doing in 2014

Creche Childcare Center ceased to exist in CY2014

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 7
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

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: -2,972,552.9%; rating input score 0; 0th 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: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -48.8% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -38.9% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2013 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.