El Dorado Center for the Visually Impaired

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
830352582
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Placerville, CA, USA
Phone
5309571069
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Blind/Visually Impaired Centers

Reported finances

Revenue
$152
Expenses
$1,159
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • ELLEN YEVDAKIMOV (Director)
  • PENNY HUTCHINSON (Treasurer)
  • RICHARD MEAGHER (ASST TREASURER)

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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Assist the blind and the visually impaired to adjust to their environment.

What it reported doing in 2015

The organization offers newly blinded and visually impaired adults (16 & over) assistance and resources in overcoming the obstacles related to vision loss. Classes are offered to train clients with new life skills. Communication classes include braille, typing, handwriting, manual alphabet, phone dialing, tape recording, and talking book machine. An orientation class is offered which teaches indoor orientation, self protective techniques and locating dropped objects. A home management class teaches basic cooking skills and safety, cleaning, laundry and labelling skills.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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

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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 8
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -662.5%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -80.7% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -49.3% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -28.3% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2011 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

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: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.