Mid-columbia Childrens Council Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
930951908
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Hood River, OR, USA
Phone
5413862010
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,251,976
Expenses
$10,706,161
Assets
$3,765,628
Liabilities
$1,520,732

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ELOY GONZALEZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ELOY GONZALEZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $186,041 total reported compensation
  • COLLICE MARTENS (FINANCE DIRECTOR): $144,673 total reported compensation
  • RONDA HULL (ASSOCIATE EXECUTIVE DIR.): $124,084 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Educating children and families with innovative, high quality early childhood learning opportunities and family partnerships to build better communities, one person at a time.

What it reported doing in 2023

Mid columbia children's council provided high quality educational and family support services for children and their families through head start/early head start programs during the fiscal year ending 11/30/2024. The head start program delivered comprehensive early childhood education services to 326 low income preschool children and their families in wasco, jefferson, and hood river counties in Oregon and skamiania and klickitat counties in Washington.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 99% 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.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.7%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 88.8%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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; 66th 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4.4%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.35; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.4; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.2%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.7% of revenue deployed · 88.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $9.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $186K · 12 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $600K reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

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 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.