Quixote Center Incorporated

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521055742
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Greenbelt, MD, USA
Phone
3016990042
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Peace and Security

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$574,103
Expenses
$550,158
Assets
$682,401
Liabilities
$243,027

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DOLORES C POMERLEAU (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • NANCY SULFRIDGE (PRESIDENT)
  • KIM M LAMBERTY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KIM M LAMBERTY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $117,439 total reported compensation
  • DOLORES C POMERLEAU (VICE PRESIDENT): $3,479 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To promote social justice and equality

What it reported doing in 2024

Haiti reborn: provided general operating support for agro-foresty initiatives in gros morne and surrounding areas. Supported the design and development of additional programs to increase household income and bring funds into the jmv agricultural center. Initiated new program with new partners in the south to expand support for local agro-forestry and commerce. Provide education about the situation in haiti, how us policies impact haiti, as well as the conditions haitian migrants face, to our network of supporters. Participate in coalitions and meetings to influence us policies that impact haiti and invite our supporters to do the same. Initiated an emergency campaign to help resettle internally-displaced persons and deportees in haiti.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 65% for direct work, and 35% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.6%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 79.2%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $67.63 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 82; 82nd 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: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • 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: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.2%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.24; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.36; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.6% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.8% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.6% of revenue deployed · 79.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $436K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $117K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.