Idaho Casa Association Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 820454803
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2017–2017
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- Boise, ID, USA
- Phone
- 2088597756
- Rating
- 36
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Child Abuse, Prevention
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $83,117
- Expenses
- $80,470
- Assets
- $11,277
- Liabilities
- $7,421
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Brandi Schmidt (Executive Director)
- Kent Hobbs (Board President)
- Ginny Acevedo (Board Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Brandi Schmidt (Executive Director)
- Kent Hobbs (Board President)
- Ginny Acevedo (Board Vice President)
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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Idaho Court Appointed Special Advocate Association works to promote, assist, and support the development, growth, and continuation of the 7 Judicial Districts CASA/GAL programs in the state and support their missions to help ensure every abused or neglected child is safe, has a permanent home and the opportunity to thrive.
What it reported doing in 2017
NCASA - Provision of technical support to 7 judicial CASA programs.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 2
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 36
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 1.6%; rating input score 2
- Program expense ratio: 1.7%; rating input score 2
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 3.2%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.14; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.66; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 1.6% of revenue deployed · 1.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 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.
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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 2/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.