Educational Destinations

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
371505589
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2021
Forms available
Form 990 2021, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Indianapolis, IN, USA
Phone
3179030122
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Services N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$248,032
Expenses
$195,906
Assets
$123,894
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MADONNA RICHARDSON CEO (CEO)
  • HAROLD RICHARDSON (PRESIDENT)
  • KERI CARTER (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MADONNA RICHARDSON CEO (CEO): $19,302 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Educational destinations seeks to maximize the health and well-being of post-incarcerated disabled veterans and their family members by advocating, educating, identifying resources, coordinating access to available and much needed benefits.

What it reported doing in 2021

Educational destination programs and services veterans are able to be in touchwith a accredited agent authorized to prepare present and prosecyte claims for veterans benefits. Each veteran that qualifiesfor benefits was made aware of a full package of life long assitance to support them and their families. Qualification for benefits are determined and the veterans received 10% of the qualified monetary benefits until they reach 90 days of release.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 72% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61.2%; rating input score 61
  • Program expense ratio: 77.5%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 21%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.63; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.9%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 31.4% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 40.4% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 95.8% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61.2% of revenue deployed · 77.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $152K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $19K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2019 to 2021
  • 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.

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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.