Kern County Braille Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237259272
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2018–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2017, Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Bakersfield, CA, USA
Phone
6613225234
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$-11,171
Expenses
$282,171
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Vin T Dang (Vice President)
  • Wafik Abdou (President)

People named in this filing

  • Jim Wren (Director)
  • Daniel H Chang MD (Director)
  • Maricel Reighard (Director)

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 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Kern County Braille Center (DBA: Center For the Blind and Visually Impaired) is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing opportunities that will enhance the lives of the blind and visually impaired people of Kern County.

What it reported doing in 2018

Orientation and mobility - orientation and mobility instruction provides training in the appropriate use of a white cane for safe independent travel. All orientation and mobility training is conducted on a one-to-one basis and typical completion time ranges from 24 to 36 hours. Support group - support group offers clients the opportunity to share challenges, insights, innovations, suggestions and feelings regarding vision loss within a safe and supportive environment.Independent living program - the goal of the independent living program is to provide instruction and information that will help clients to maintain their own households.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 65% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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: 22
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Sustainability: 8
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: 60.5%; rating input score 60

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2,625.9%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 0% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -10.8% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $171K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 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.

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: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.