Great Kids with Adhd a Texas Non-profit Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
752859490
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Plano, TX, USA
Phone
9725177498
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Primary, Elementary Schools

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,755,382
Expenses
$1,941,908
Assets
$3,991,586
Liabilities
$1,414,748

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • M BORSTEN (DIRECTOR): $156,495 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Non-profit k-12 private school for students with learning disabilities. Gla provides social skills training and academics specifically designed to teach, assist and provide tools to students diagnosed with learning disabilities,

What it reported doing in 2024

K-12 special education program: great kids w/adhd operates a school known as great lakes academy. Gla educates children in 4th through 12th grade with various learning disabilities; adhd, autism spectrum disorder, pdd-nos, bipolar disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, oppositional disorder, language, auditory, processing and anxiety disorders. Gla serves 70 to 100 students per academic year. Gla provides social skills training and other necessary tools to assist children with social and learning issues. Gla also provides core academics and utilizes traditional and non-traditional teaching methods including multi-sensory, auditory, and visual.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 88% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.5%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 84.2%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.7 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.6%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.06; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.35; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.1%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93.5% of revenue deployed · 84.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $156K · 3 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.