Parent Possible

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841169805
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
3038606000
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,035,388
Expenses
$3,698,427
Assets
$2,534,934
Liabilities
$335,458

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • BRIAN CONLY (EXECUTIVE DI): $138,722 total reported compensation
  • LAURA KNUDTSON (SENIOR DIREC): $105,758 total reported compensation
  • JUANITA PUGA (DIRECTOR): $15,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We envision a Colorado where every family is a thriving ecosystem of learning, laughing, and well-being. Our mission is to equip parents with the tools and information to be their child's most valuable teacher, trainer, and mentor in life.

What it reported doing in 2024

Parent possible promotes and supports evidence-based, high-quality programs focused on parents of children aged birth through kindergarten. Each program seeks to engage with parents where they are by inspiring parent involvement, facilitating school readiness, and strengthening opportunities for children to achieve their full potential. Parent possible administers three critical evidence-based family programs throughout rural and urban communities in Colorado including home instruction for parents of preschool youngsters (hippy), parents as teachers (pat), and vroom. These evidence-based programs utilize trained community home visitors who equip parents/caregivers with tools and knowledge to have confidence in their ability to be their child's first teacher, ensure their child is supported and learning in the home, and positively impact their child's success in school and throughout life.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 66% for direct work, and 34% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 70.5%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $32.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

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: 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: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 23rd 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: 8.4%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.69; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65% of revenue deployed · 70.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 13 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $139K · 21 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 27 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 23 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.