Miami Valley Child Development Centers

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
310713127
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Dayton, OH, USA
Phone
(937) 236-7655
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Child Day Care

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$53,333,309
Expenses
$44,639,722
Assets
$26,236,597
Liabilities
$7,434,887

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BERTA VELILLA (PRESIDENT/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • BERTA VELILLA (PRESIDENT/CEO): $293,160 total reported compensation
  • STEVEN M KANDEL (COO): $212,782 total reported compensation
  • SCOTT SIEGFRIED (CIO): $200,698 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We deliver exceptional early childhood education and develop compassionate partnerships with families to support them in realizing their hopes and dreams.

What it reported doing in 2024

Child education - provides early childhood educational services to approximately 2,509 children aged birth to five years. Funding is provided primarily through the u.s. Department of health and human services. Mvcdc partners with 22 private child care operations, as well as 15 additional child care center based partners offering both full day and part day programs to fit most parents' work schedules. Transportation services are provided for some children to ensure that they have a safe and reliable means to obtain services. Mvcdc also provides early detection health assessments to help identify the need for health related medical, dental, mental health, and nutritional care.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 97% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.2%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 91%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th 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: 16.3%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.59; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.6%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 9 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 76.2% of revenue deployed · 91% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $40.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $293K · 20 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.