Down Syndrome Network of Greater Greensboro

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
471567568
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2019–2023
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2018
Location
Greensboro, NC, USA
Rating
51
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$36,411
Expenses
$42,769
Assets
$155,386
Liabilities
$75,062

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Lindsay Laney (Vice President - Interim President)

People named in this filing

  • Lindsay Laney (Vice President - Interim President)
  • Lindsay Lang (Treasurer)
  • Megan Williams (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Down Syndrome Network of Greater Greensboro is committed to enriching the lives of individuals with Down Syndrome by connecting with new families providing social and educational opportunities for our members and promoting awareness and inclusion of individuals with Down Syndrome in our community.

What it reported doing in 2023

The DSNGG hosts weekly and monthly programs including Movie Nights Food Therapy Coffee and Connect Yoga classes Inclusive play dates etc. The DSNGG also assists families in purchasing adaptive items and send families to conferences and events to advocate for individuals with Down Syndrome.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 84% 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

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: 32
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 33.9%; rating input score 34
  • Program expense ratio: 28.9%; rating input score 29

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -17.5%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.63; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.48; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.1%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.5% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -12.8% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.2% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 33.9% of revenue deployed · 28.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $12K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2023
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 34/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 29/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.