Minnesota Early Learning Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
710984782
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2011
Forms available
Form 990 2011
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
6124927394
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$78,767
Expenses
$2,030,466
Assets
$987,511
Liabilities
$292,361

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the Minnesota early learning foundation (melf) is to recommend cost-effective strategies to prepare children for success in kindergarten. From 2005-2009, melf researched, built and launched pilot programs designed to help achieve our mission. In 2010, we incorporated what we have learned into specific, actionable policy recommendations that we vetted with stakeholders, donors, lawmakers, and others. The melf board then made the decision to go beyond reporting recommendations, instead choosing to work to implement them. In its final year of operation, 2011, melf will work to reform Minnesota's existing early care and education system through efforts at the Minnesota legislature and the federal level.

What it reported doing in 2011

From 2006-2011 the Minnesota early learning foundation (melf) raised 20 million in private funds from Minnesota's generous philanthropic community. During its early years of operation melf successfully researched, built, and launched pilot programs designed to answer questions that would move it closer to achieving its mission - to recommend cost effective strategies to prepare children for success in kindergarden. Beginning in 2010, melf began a gradual shift in focus from building and operating programs to incorporating its learnings into policy recommendations. The melf board then made a decision to go beyond reporting its recommendations, instead choosing to work to implement them. In response, melf launched a public relations campaign to educate minnesotans about both the importance of early learning and the need to reform the existing system, and a related advocacy effort to pass the proposed reforms through the Minnesota legislature. The resuult of these efforts is a commitment from the state to take melf's signature reform, parent aware, a system that gives parents information about the quality of early care and education programs by rating them on a one-to-four star basis, from pilot status to a statewide system. 2011 is melf's predetermined last year of operation. Melf spent its final months summing up its work and solidifying its legacy. See www.melf.us for more detailed information.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

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: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2,477.8%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.49; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -145.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -99.2% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $163K · 15 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2010 to 2011
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.