Foundation for Autism Care Education and Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
204767823
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Spring, TX, USA
Phone
2817576750
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health

Reported finances

Revenue
$659,981
Expenses
$389,890
Assets
$780,333
Liabilities
$137,488

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NANCY RADCLIFFE (President & CEO)
  • KATHY SCHAEFER (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • LAUREN MCCOWN (DIRECTOR): $65,301 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Applied behavior analysis provides evidence-based intervention and hope. It is the most studied and validated therapy for children with autism and costs up to $5,000 per month, making it unaffordable for many families.

What it reported doing in 2024

Autism creates a bewildering world for both the child and his or her family. It involves difficulty understanding and interpreting social communication and is often combined with restricted interests and/or repetitive behavior. An inability to function successfully at home and school often compromises social and academic progress and is disheartening to all. By providing scholarships for applied behavior analysis (aba), children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder are taught new functional strategies that improve outcomes for both child and family.in 2024, 126 children were awarded $350,483 in applied behavior analysis scholarships. Since beginning its life changing work in 2006, the foundation for autism care, education, and services has awarded more than $3 million in aba scholarships.scholarships are determined by confirmed diagnosis and demonstrated need for financial help to pay for applied behavior analysis (aba) beyond what insurance will cover. Most applications come from working families with children who have just been diagnosed and cannot afford recommended treatment and families who cannot afford treatment due to extenuating circumstances.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 72% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 81% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 89
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 50.6%; rating input score 51
  • Program expense ratio: 84.1%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.01 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 61.8%; rating input score 62; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 40.9%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.7%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.6% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 50.6% of revenue deployed · 84.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $328K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $65K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 51/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 50/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.