Montessori Community School Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
593622950
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Tampa, FL, USA
Phone
8133341631
Rating
35
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,868,079
Expenses
$1,959,122
Assets
$1,381,596
Liabilities
$476,380

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NANCY BOWMAN (PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN BOWMAN (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • NANCY BOWMAN (PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN BOWMAN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ANNA WRIGHT (OFFICER)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide education for children in preschool and grades 1 through 9.

What it reported doing in 2024

Our goal was to provide the very best education for children following the methods and philosophies that were true to the vision of maria montessori. Enrollment grew each year and classrooms were added to meet the demand as space allowed. In 1993, the program was expanded to include an elementary program for children 6 to 9 years old, and in 1996, community montessori school moved the elementary program to a spacious location around the corner on civic road. At this additional location, cms was able to add an upper elementary program for students up to 12 years of age. In early 2000, cms became a not-for-profit school. It was also presented with an opportunity to purchase the property that housed and surrounded the civic road campus. The acquisition of this property gave the school the physical space to embark on the next phases of growth: to develop an adolescent program for students up to age 15 and build a new campus which could house all levels of community montessori school. In the 2006 2007 school year we completed the first phase of growth and developed our adolescent program. The following year, the seventh and eighth year students moved into the newly renovated adolescent building located near our meeting house on the memorial highway side of our property. We welcomed more new additions to our civic road campus during our 2007- 2008 school year. The adolescent program planned and built an incredible organic garden near their classroom. They have learned about beekeeping and currently maintain 2 beehives on campus.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 84% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

REVIEW - 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: 5
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 6.1%; rating input score 6
  • Program expense ratio: 5.8%; rating input score 6
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: -4.9%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.71; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.34; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.4% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 6.1% of revenue deployed · 5.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $114K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 6/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.