Guilford Association of Educational Support Services Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
320240596
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2014
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Guilford, CT, USA
Phone
2034532741
Rating
42
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,980
Expenses
$24,240
Assets
$82,532

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JANE YATES (CO-PRESIDENT)
  • KATHY POTTER (CO-PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JANE YATES (CO-PRESIDENT)
  • KATHY POTTER (CO-PRESIDENT)
  • MARY MARATRA (VICE PRESIDE)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The association is a collective bargaining unit representing clerical, secretarial and para professional employees of the guilford, Connecticut board of education. The association conducts negotiations with the guilford, Connecticut board of education every three years for a new employment contract for the association members. The association retains the services of an attorney for the purposes of representation during collective bargaining negotiations and also to represent members of the collective bargaining unit when concerns arise regarding contractual issues. The association collects union dues from its members through payroll deductions. The association confers two scholarships each year to graduating seniors. The association holds one social event each year for its members.

What it reported doing in 2014

The association conducts negotiations with the town of guilford on behalf of its members as a collective bargaining unit that represents clerical, secretarial and para-professional employees that are employed by the guilford, Connecticut board of education.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Transfer-based 990-EZ. The 990-EZ reports grants or member benefits, but it does not separate enough spending to show the nonprofit’s full delivery mix.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 16
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 25.7%; rating input score 26
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -247.3%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.4; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 25.7% of revenue deployed
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.