Littleton Childrens Fund Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
223060983
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2016
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2016, Form 990-N 2011
Location
Littleton, MA, USA
Phone
9784965947
Rating
45
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Physical Fitness and Community Recreational Facilities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$67,914
Expenses
$66,175
Assets
$28,907
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Solomon Marini (President)

People named in this filing

  • Solomon Marini (President)
  • Eric Bergeron (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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Maintain and support the Castle in the Tree Playground at 300 King St in Littleton MA. In September of 2016 the playground was rebuilt with a community build.

What it reported doing in 2016

In 2014 we were contemplating dissolving the non-profit until a playground inspection identified that the older children's section of the playground would have to be rebuilt. The funds would have to be raised privately, so we gathered a group of local parents in October 2014 to form a rebuild committee. Our goal is to raise $300,000 in funds and in-kind donations to rebuild the older children's section of the playground in September 2016. In 2015, fundraising continued, a community playground vendor was hired to design the playground and assist with a community build. The build is scheduled for September 2016.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.6%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.44; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 18.9% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 67% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2013 to 2016
  • 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 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.