Naples Children Foundation
Legal name: Naples Children Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 651001650
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Naples, Florida, US
- Phone
- 239-514-2239
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Private Independent Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $47,618,532
- Expenses
- $30,388,066
- Assets
- $130,433,725
- Liabilities
- $24,294,450
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
19 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MARIA JIMENEZ-LARA (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- MARIA JIMENEZ-LARA (CEO): $349,753 total reported compensation
- JOAN LARSON (CFO): $315,336 total reported compensation
- LISA JULIANO (SVP NWWF & EVENT PRODUCTION): $230,892 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
For 26 years, the Naples Children Foundation has fueled transformative change for Collier County's most vulnerable children. We identify urgent gaps, invest boldly in research-backed solutions and fund collaborative, data-driven programs that deliver lasting results.
What it reported doing in 2024
The out-of-school time initiative in immokalee provides purposeful programs for at-risk students, aiming to enhance academic performance and overall well-being. Efforts include resource leveraging, capacity expansion, academic support, and enrichment opportunities in collaboration with community partners. Tailored to meet the needs of at-risk youth, programs are age-specific and locally customized. The services offer academic and resiliency support for at-risk immokalee students from kindergarten through 12th grade, spanning both the school year and summer. Each program emphasizes strong academic and leadership components, tailored to the strengths of each partnering organization.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 95% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 75
- Transparency & Controls: 77
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 80
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 69.3%; rating input score 69
- Program expense ratio: 90.6%; rating input score 91
- Fundraising efficiency: $21.1 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Pass
- 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; 72nd 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- 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: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 36.2%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.29; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.8%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 69.3% of revenue deployed · 90.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $27.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $350K · 19 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 56 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 50 filed related-organization links
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.