Partnership for Americas Children

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472234949
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2024550243
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,063,802
Expenses
$1,460,031
Assets
$1,564,363
Liabilities
$47,836

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARQUITA LITTLE NUMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARQUITA LITTLE NUMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $177,848 total reported compensation
  • ELISSA GLUCKSMAN HYNE (SR. CHILD WELFARE POLICY MANAGER): $116,609 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of the partnership for america's children (the partnership) is to engage, empower, and invest in a network of state and local child advocates who advance transformative, systemic, and equitable policy change for the well-being of every child across the nation.

What it reported doing in 2024

The partnership for america's children is a national network of over 40 independent, multi-issue child advocacy organizations across 38 states. Our goal is to support and strengthen state and local child advocacy organizations in their work to improve policies and outcomes for children and families. The partnership connects its members to one another and to national partners through convenings, webinars, peer learning, and technical assistance that build advocacy skills, policy expertise, and organizational capacity. It also administers regrants, links members with philanthropic partners, and leads national initiatives such as count all kids. In 2024, the partnership provided 19 training and peer learning opportunities, reached more than 750 advocates nationwide with reports, briefs, and data, and administered over half a million dollars in regrants to support state and local advocacy campaigns.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 62% for direct work, and 38% for grants.

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.9%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 70.6%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -37.2%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.07; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.2%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.7% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.6% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.4% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96.9% of revenue deployed · 70.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $178K · 12 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 16 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 14 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.