Early Learning Property Management Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
582491036
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
Phone
6783771777
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,660,018
Expenses
$4,743,089
Assets
$30,600,966
Liabilities
$999,341

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KARA PORTNELL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KARA PORTNELL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $219,167 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL LUNTSFORD (PROJECT MGR./BLDG OPS): $119,368 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To transform early childhood development in underserved communities by building and maintaining high quality, safe facilities and enhancing existing centers.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization performs two related functions. The first is to purchase or build facilities for early learning programs run by 501(c)(3) organizations, such as headstart. As of december 31, 2025, the organization has completed eleven construction/renovation projects. Upon completion of the construction/renovation, the properties are leased at a below-market rent to 501(c)(3) organizations which provide early learning programs. Such rent covers the costs of leasing and maintaining the facilities as well as future capital improvements. As of december 31, 2025, the organization has leased the eleven completed projects.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 61% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 63
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 84.9%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 48.2%; rating input score 48; 20th 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 16.2%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.45; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.1%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 84.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $219K · 13 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.4M reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 21 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 48/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 44/100.