Piqua Parents as Teachers

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200922103
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Piqua, OH, USA
Phone
9376150228
Rating
95
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Parent/Teacher Group

Reported finances

Revenue
$68,522
Expenses
$64,368
Assets
$53,755

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

People named in this filing

  • KATHY BOOHER (CO-DIRECTOR)
  • KIM LAWSON (CO-DIRECTOR)
  • MOLLI BAKER (TREASURER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The purpose of parents as teachers (pat) is to 1)increase parent knowledge of early childhood development and improve parenting practices, 2)provide early detection of developmental delays and health issues, 3)prevent child abuse and neglect, 4)increase children's school readiness and school success.

What it reported doing in 2024

Piqua parents as teachers provides free parent education and support for any parent of a child between the ages of birth to kindergarten entry. Parent educators work with the parent and child in their home to acheive all of the goals set forth in the organization's statement of purpose.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 85% 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.

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: 95
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.5%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 98.5%; rating input score 98

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.1%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.84; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.5% of revenue deployed · 98.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $63K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.