Kids for Excellence Parent Teacher Organization
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 273941824
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2011–2017
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2010
- Location
- Damascus, OR, USA
- Phone
- 5036586253
- Rating confidence
- Limited
- Sector
- Parent/Teacher Group
Reported finances
- Expenses
- $16,860
- Assets
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- KITTY CASTRO-LEON (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- KITTY CASTRO-LEON (PRESIDENT)
- SIU LEI CHAN (SECRETARY)
- MARGIE MENZIA (TREASURER)
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
Kids for excellence parent teacher organiztion ("kids") was formed as an organizational arm of the neighborhood learning center ("nlc"), a 501(c) (3), to enhance the learning environment of and provide educational opportunities to k-12 children in the certain counties in the states of Oregon and Washington through tutoring and other complementary services as a collaboration of parents with schools and the community at large. Kids was formed as an organizational arm of nlc in order to spearhead fundraising efforts and design certain tutoring services and programs to carry out the organization's mission. Kids will hire nlc as an independent contractor to implement and deliver these tutoring programs to students.
What it reported doing in 2017
Kids created volunteer programs and resources to promote the education and well-being of all children at home, school and in the community. Kids also provided a forum for discussion and foster communication between parents, administrators, educators and the community and to raise funds to provide for these objectives.
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
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 65% for direct work, and 35% for 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: 37
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 10
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: 98.7%; rating input score 99
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: Limited
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 50.8% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 98.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $17K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 3 of 3 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2011 to 2017
- 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.