Cumberland Childrens Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201115980
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Crossville, TN, USA
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Children's, Youth Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$386,786
Expenses
$390,964
Assets
$274,553
Liabilities
$117,905

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sara Bradshaw (President)
  • Denise Melton (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Donna Evans (Member)
  • Sara Bradshaw (President)
  • Zoe Clark (Secretary)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the corporation is to assist the various law enforcement and child welfare agencies of the State of Tennessee and Cumb Co, as well as to educate and inform the public of as to how to detect and prevent child abuse.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization has established a Client Services program to assist parents who have children in their home or are working on unification with the children. These individuals would be Department of Children Services clients or past clients of the organization. All individuals must go through a need assessment before receiving funds from the organization. The organization has a scholarship fund in memory of Hope who lost her life to abuse. The organization was created in her honor. Grace program

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 98% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.1%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 79.9%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $45.68 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.1%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.7; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.43; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.1% of revenue deployed · 79.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $312K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 30 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • 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.
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.