Kalamazoo County Ready 4S
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 273342489
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2011
- Location
- Kalamazoo, MI, USA
- Phone
- 2693669140
- Rating
- 87
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,323,941
- Expenses
- $1,778,246
- Assets
- $6,475,965
- Liabilities
- $223,754
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- REGENA NELSON (PAST PRESIDENT)
- JOANNA DALES (PRESIDENT)
- MINDY MILLER (VICE-PRESIDENT)
- SHERRIA VANSPARRENTAK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- SHERRIA VANSPARRENTAK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $65,310 total reported compensation
- KRISTYN BUHL-LEPISTO (PAST EXEC DIRECTOR): $53,168 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of kalamazoo county ready 4s is to "advance fully accessible, high-quality pre-kindergarten education for every 3- and 4-year-old in kalamazoo county through collaborative leadership with public and private community partners."
What it reported doing in 2024
To support high-quality learning environments, kc ready 4s accomplished the following during the school year: provided tuition assistance for 4-year-olds and 3-year-olds who were enrolled in a program that was rated at 4 or 5 stars under Michigan's great start to quality improvement system; conducted class observations to measure and set goals related to high-quality interactions between the teacher and children; provided over 3,000 hours of training and classroom support; offered professional development sessions; provided children with speech/language support, behavior & occupational therapy support; provided comprehensive partners (26 schools) with access to an employee assistance program; and connected with family members who attended orientation meetings and workshops or participated in home visits.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 41% for direct work, and 59% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 86
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 38
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 78.4%; rating input score 78
- Fundraising efficiency: $10.75 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: -34.3%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.64; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.7%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 15.7% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 78.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $65K · 16 people listed
- Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 40/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 48/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.