Dane County Parent Council Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391418945
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Madison, WI, USA
Phone
6082756740
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$20,203,809
Expenses
$20,447,587
Assets
$20,452,571
Liabilities
$4,501,383

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEN BAILEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/CEO)
  • RICHELLE LADWIG (PRESIDENT)
  • CHARA TAYLOR (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JEN BAILEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/CEO): $175,327 total reported compensation
  • CHARLES BRIDWELL (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $137,299 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Dane county parent council changes the lives of underserved children and families through education and supportive services.

What it reported doing in 2024

Child education: head start is a comprehensive preschool program that provides a wide array of services that result in children being ready for success in both school and in life. These components include child health, mental health and nutrition, education and services to children with diagnosed disabilities, parent engagement and family support services and community partnerships. The goal of the head start program is social competence as the primary foundation for school readiness. Head start performance standards define the program regulations and components of the program. Head start has been a leader in emphasizing the importance of parent engagement and of community support for the local program.dane county parent council, inc. (dcpc) is funded to serve 568 children in head start. Services are provided via home based, part day center based, and full day center based options. In addition to head start program performance standards, center based programs must also meet state licensing and city accreditation standards. The full day program option serves exclusively working families who qualify for a child care subsidy.dcpc is also a community provider of 4k services in the madison, deforest, sun prairie, monroe, and verona school districts. Almost all of the four year old children enrolled in head start are also enrolled in 4k.federal funding for the early head start program (ehs) began in response to early childhood research on the importance of early brain development. It was clear, from the results of the research, that the earlier effective intervention occurs the better the chances a child will have for a successful future. Dcpc began offering ehs program services in 1999. Early head start program regulations are also defined by the head start program performance standards. However, while head start is focused on providing a preschool experience to prepare children for kindergarten, the primary focus of early head start is supporting the parent-child relationship. Dcpc is funded to serve 188 early head start children. The program offers both home based and center based program options.the green county early head start program serves 20 children through the family foundations home visitation (ffhv) grant. The ffhv program is funded by a federal grant awarded to the states and designed to expand home visitation services through evidence based models. Children enrolled in the green county ffhv program receive services through the early head start home visitation program. The ffhv grant also has additional requirements above and beyond head start program performance standards. Green county ffhv was selected to participate in mihope, which is a federally funded research program designed to measure the effectiveness of home visitation program models.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 78% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 96
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.5%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 95.2%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $417.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -1.2%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.5%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96.5% of revenue deployed · 95.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $19.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $175K · 9 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.6M reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.