Guided by Goats Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 884151066
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023
- Location
- Cheshire, CT, USA
- Phone
- 2035581148
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Services N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $283,624
- Expenses
- $263,732
- Assets
- $30,783
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Daniel Morton (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Daniel Morton (Executive Director): $55,740 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our mission is to provide families of all abilities with the confidence to enjoy their community through learning, play, and nature-based activities.
What it reported doing in 2024
We began hosting volunteers from Oak Hill School to come to our farm and gain job skills. They learned animal care, job skills, and money skills. They hosted a farm market where they sold eggs to participants at the play groups we run. These volunteers are individuals in high school with special needs. This program is the heart of what we do, and a major focus going forward as we want to help individuals in this population become more prepared for adult life. We also developed and began hosting social groups, speech groups and occupational therapy groups to assist individuals diagnosed with autism learn new skills. We also established our in-home ABA services for individuals diagnosed with autism. We provide parent training, behavior reduction, and replacement behavior training at these sessions. Lastly, we established our open play groups. At open play we provide families of all abilities a space to play in nature and connect with each other. Inclusive play is encouraged as we want children diagnosed with autism to be around individuals who do not have a diagnosis. We also want individuals without a diagnosis to be with those who do have one. We believe this type of event will help others understand their peers unique needs and create a world of understanding in the future. Open play is also a chance for parents who have questions about their children connect with a professional in the human service field and learn more about interventions out there. We have had 219 signups in our limited sessions and programs we hosted on our small farm last year.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 99% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 39
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 93%; rating input score 93
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 7%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.12; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 21.1%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 122.3% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 103% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 93% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $264K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $56K · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 41 of 41 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.