Gila Educational Group

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
710884077
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2009
Forms available
Form 990 2009
Location
Safford, AZ, USA
Phone
9283488688
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Charter Schools

Reported finances

Revenue
$730,242
Expenses
$755,404
Assets
$132,918
Liabilities
$10,330

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2009. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2009. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To create a nurturing environment for the intellectual, creative, social, and physical developemnt

What it reported doing in 2009

To create a nurturing environment for the intellectual, creative, social, and physical development of at-risk students who: manifest behavioral issues; return to school after dropping out; require assistance to improve their academic performance; are pregnant or young parents; have been adjudicated through the court system. This nurturing takes place in a positive, cooperative setting. Students internalize life-long learning as modeled by staff and parents. We envision our positive contributions to the future.

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: 90
  • Accountability: 61
  • Sustainability: 27
  • 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: 60%; rating input score 60; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.4%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.18; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.3%; rating input score 18; 18th 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: 3 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $624K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $60K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.