Mount Olivet Lab School Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 203320672
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2007
- Location
- Saint Paul, MN, USA
- Phone
- 6517558230
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Youth Development Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $248,545
- Expenses
- $185,926
- Assets
- $135,187
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ANDREA THOMAS (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- ANDREA THOMAS (PRESIDENT): $19,379 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To ensure the healthy development of children, youth and families in the communities we serve. This is accomplished by reducing the disparities that exist between mainstream communities and communities of color.
What it reported doing in 2025
In 2025, we continued to respond to community needs by providing a broad range of nutritious foods, including fresh produce, meats, dairy products, baby foods, and key pantry staples. We also distributed essential household and personal-care items such as diapers, cleaning supplies, personal hygiene products, covid-19-related masks and ppe, and paper goods. All items were offered at no cost to participants. Each week, approximately 250 families (1000+ individuals) received groceries, prepared meals, and essential household supplies through the mount olivet lab school, inc. Reductions in snap benefits limited the quantity of household goods and ppe we were able to distribute, even as demand for services increased. During this period, many nearby food distribution sites closed or reduced operations, resulting in a significant rise in first-time visitors seeking support. On average, each household received 50 to 60 pounds of food per visit, including culturally responsive foods aligned with the four most requested food groups. Youth enrichment programs focused on leadership development and incorporated our venture lab curriculum, which provided hands-on learning in food distribution operations and encouraged entrepreneurial skill-building while students earned volunteer service hours. Additionally, we partnered with three university of st. Thomas courses to offer experiential learning and volunteer opportunities that strengthened community engagement and increased organizational capacity.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 62% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 80
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 79
- Sustainability: 58
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 72%; rating input score 72
- Program expense ratio: 96.2%; rating input score 96
- Fundraising efficiency: $35.26 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 25.2%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.73; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.4%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -5.2% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 17.1% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 72% of revenue deployed · 96.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $179K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $19K · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2020 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.