Parents Education Network C/o Laura Cashion

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
432008436
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4157171607
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Developmentally Disabled Centers

Reported finances

Revenue
$421,569
Expenses
$531,492
Assets
$117,108
Liabilities
$134,080

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MELISSA FEDERONKO (PRESIDENT EF)

Highest reported compensation

  • LAURA MALONEY (PRES/BD T0 1): $54,102 total reported compensation
  • MELISSA FEDERONKO (PRESIDENT EF): $50,246 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Parents education network is a parent coalition collaborating with educators, students and the community to empower and bring academic and life success to students with learning and attention differences.

What it reported doing in 2016

Edrev this annual, national conference produced by pen is a unique day organized to support students with learning and attention differences (ld), their families and the educators who teach them. It provides a collaborative atmosphere, access to accurate information on learning and attention differences and over 100+ resources. It features a keynote presentation, workshops, exhibitors and culminates with a student celebration. This event provides hopeful examples of the future and lessens the stigma associated with ld. Attendees leave the life-changing event with a new appreciation of the strengths of students with ld that they take with them to share with their local communities. Edrev builds a community of connection, support and accurate understanding that increases hope and knowledge, lowers anxiety and decreases stigma around ld. Edrev features: the latest technology that supports learning, a wide range of informative, relevant workshops, music and outdoor activities for students, over 100 exhibitors in the school and career fair, testing and solution center, and the community corner, student art gallery and hands-on activities in the creativity unleashed section. This event is a natural gathering place for other organizations within the field to come together, learn about each others' projects and initiatives to increase collaboration.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 82% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 12
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.1%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 60.4%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 22nd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -26.1%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.22; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.14; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.6%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -13.8% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.1% of revenue deployed · 60.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $321K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $54K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.