Dragonfly Heart Camp
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 260590421
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2011–2011
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2011
- Location
- Chestertown, MD, USA
- Rating
- 70
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Limited
- Sector
- Heart and Circulatory System Diseases, Disorders
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $35,213
- Expenses
- $29,654
- Assets
- $8,838
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The organization was formed to provide an outdoor camping experience for children who have, or are about to have, heart transplants; lung, or double transplants; or have contracted pulmonary hypertension (a fatal disease which impacts the heart and lungs).
What it reported doing in 2011
During 2010, camp dragonfly was able to provide a summer camp experience for 30 students and 14 accompanying medical staff at echo hill outdoor school. The camp was a five day outdoor experience for the patients and the medical staff responsible for their direct care. The camp allowed these patients to experience enrichment opportunities which would otherwise not be available to them because of their medical conditions.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and the available information about grant readiness automatic revocation leaves an important question unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 70
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 65.1%; rating input score 65
- Program expense ratio: 77.3%; rating input score 77
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 15.8%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: Limited
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 65.1% of revenue deployed · 77.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $23K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.