English for Action

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
050517099
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Providence, RI, USA
Phone
4014213181
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$28,940
Expenses
$113,736
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • XIOMARA PAULINO (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • SHIRLEY FUERTES (DIRECT SERVICES COORDINATO): $58,830 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

English for action's (efa) mission is to create opportunities for the self-empowerment of immigrant families in Rhode Island. Through participatory english language, childcare, and other educational programs, we link language learning, leadership development and community-building. We use innovative learning tools, such as the visual arts, theater of the oppressed and action projects to engage adults and younger learners in dialogue, reflection and collaboration. Through these processes, we strive to create transformative learning communities inside and outside the classroom, in order to effect meaningful and community-based social changed in olneyville and the greater providence community.

What it reported doing in 2018

Provide low-cost english classes to adult immigrants (esol- english for speakers of other languages). Provide training and stipends to teachers to facilitate the classes. Learners gain language, leadership & community-building skills. Efa did not receive 2018-19 program funding from the state of Rhode Island. The board of directors elected to end program operations effective 3/31/2019.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 91% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 6
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 98.6%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th 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; 64th 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -293%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 51.7%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -10.5% per year; rating input score 0; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.4% per year; rating input score 0; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 98.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $112K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $59K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.