Essential Learning of Minnesota

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272825341
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2012
Forms available
Form 990 2012, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Specialized Education Institutions

Reported finances

Revenue
$177,281
Expenses
$154,326
Assets
$22,955
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Providing an inspiring academic, recreational, and social experience which empowers students to reach their highest potential.

What it reported doing in 2012

Essential Learning of Minnesota Institute provides after school and weakend programs to minority students in order to bridge the gap between them and mainstream students. The above list is some of our accomplishments thus far. -Develop effective homework/study routines -Develop and enhance individualized study skills -Build confidence and self-esteem -Learn to take responsibility for their actions -Make healthy choices and establish positive relationships -Grow by participating in new challenges -Improve the MCA test scores -Encourage young children to become good citizens. -Helped train parents to be engaged with their childs education.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 30
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 60th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12.9%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.15; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $154K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 11 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.