Crisman Preparatory School

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
751217500
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Longview, TX, USA
Phone
9037589741
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Specialized Education Institutions

Reported finances

Revenue
$492,633
Expenses
$491,492
Assets
$424,198
Liabilities
$21,953

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • LAURA LEA BLANKS (HEAD OF SCHO): $60,825 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Education of learning disabled children

What it reported doing in 2017

The school provides education services to children with learning disabilities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 77% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The required major-donor schedule is missing or incomplete and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.9%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 73.9%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.2%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.86; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.4%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.2% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.9% of revenue deployed · 73.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $363K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $61K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2013 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.