Monarch Parents Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
202122006
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018, Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Sandpoint, ID, USA
Phone
8474121300
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alumni Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$270
Expenses
$6,374
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RHONDA BELLO (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • NINA REGO (CO-SECRETARY)
  • RHONDA BELLO (PRESIDENT)
  • MELANIE REYNOLDS (VICE-PRESIDE)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the monarch parent foundation is to support and assist current and alumni therapeutic boarding school students and parents of students attending emotional growth boarding schools to complete their school's programs successfully with maximum benefits; successfully retain, build on and utilize their tools and values after graduation; and build an inclusive, supportive, participatory, and accessible community.

What it reported doing in 2018

The monarch parents foundation awarded grants directly and indirectly to families of teenage youth at risk of not successfully gaining entry to and/or completing therapeutic programs necessary to obtain a high school education. Grants were also provided to qualified charitable organizations with similar missions to, primarily enable families to finance attendance in emotional growth schools where cost would-be otherwise prohibitive. The final grant was awarded during the short year ending march 31, 2019.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 9
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 34.5%; rating input score 35
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2,260.7%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 34.8% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -32.8% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -30.1% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 34.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2014 to 2018
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.