Green Valley School Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043766294
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2009
Forms available
Form 990 2009
Location
Putney, VT, USA
Phone
8023872298
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Child Day Care

Reported finances

Revenue
$127,465
Expenses
$124,634
Assets
$13,122
Liabilities
$8,687

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

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

Overview

Mission

Green Valley Schools mission is to cultivate health, freedom, and reverence for the natural world for children, families and the greater community through a nature based outdoor nursery and pre-kindergarten program informed by the insights of Rudolf Steiner, founder of Waldorf Education, and Dr. Emmi Pikler, Hungarian Pediatrician and renowned child advocate.

What it reported doing in 2009

SUMMER CAMP - During the summer of 2009 our summer camp program was in its beginning stages of development and planning. It was offered to children one to five years old for three days a week over a 5 week period from June to August. We served 10 children and the suggested donation was between 120 - 180 per week. The summer camp curriculum was based on spending the day outdoors exploring, making crafts, and singing songs. Our camp continued in 2010, running from June 14th through August 13th.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 69% 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: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 31
  • 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: 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: 2.2%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.11; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.66; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 59.8%; rating input score 5; 5th 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: 6 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $97K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $19K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.