National Children's Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
530260523
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Silver Spring, MD, US
Phone
(202) 722-2300
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$28,592,965
Expenses
$30,345,714
Assets
$11,261,674
Liabilities
$10,605,369

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TERRANCE KING (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
  • LISA PROCTOR (VICE PRESIDENT, EXTERNAL AFFAIRS)

Highest reported compensation

  • TERRANCE KING (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $344,711 total reported compensation
  • MISTY JOHNSON-ORATOKHAI (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $235,148 total reported compensation
  • LISA PROCTOR (VICE PRESIDENT, EXTERNAL AFFAIRS): $172,829 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

NCC's personalized services have benefited thousands of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities by providing educational development and life skills that have lead to empowerment, employment and independent living.

What it reported doing in 2024

The residential services program creates homes for people with developmental disabilities that are characterized by warmth and respect. The program provides services to individuals with developmental disabilities in various settings. The services are individualized to assist in nonvocational activities that will enable the individuals to live in their own home, apartment, family home or agency site. Program sites consist of apartments and houses that are located in residential neighborhoods in prince georges and montgomery county, and the district of columbia. The program offers a continuum of care, and varying degrees of support from 24-hour to limited drop-in supervision. Services provided to individuals consists of community integration, professional support services, training in activities of daily living and other areas, person centered planning, assistance with assistive technology, 24-hour emergency assistance, resource coordination, training in food preparation, nutritional services and nursing & medical services. Many of the individuals have secondary disabilities, such as deafness, mental health challenges, and autism. The sites have been modified as needed to be accessible to the individuals, and offer modern adaptive equipment, such as flashing light systems, ramps, tdds, etc. Two homes are designed for residents who communicate via sign language, and the staff in these homes is fluent in sign language. The goals and program for each resident are determined by each individual's needs and preferences, with an ultimate goal of maximizing independence, productivity, and community integration. The program is committed to a team approach that encourages communication with family and day programs. Individuals are fully integrated into their communities, and utilize a wide variety of community resources for recreation and learning.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 86% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.9%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 82.8%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $57.34 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 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: -6.1%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.37; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.94; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.5%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0% per year; rating input score 100; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 87.9% of revenue deployed · 82.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $25.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $345K · 20 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $1.4M reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.