Red Hen Press Inc

What it reported doing in 2024

Student poetry workshops and wits hq: for over 20 years, red hen press has brought poetry education to underserved students in pasadena and los angeles through our writing in the schools (wits) program. This program serves participating students, teachers, and schools at no cost, reaching approximately 350 students annually by bringing published authors directly into classrooms to teach the craft of writing. Host schools are title i schools, meaning at least 40% of impacted students come from low-income families. Our wits program targets underserved elementary, middle, and high school students in los angeles county made up of the following demographics: 85% latinx/hispanic, 11% african american, 2% asian american, <1% european american, <1% native american, and <1% middle eastern.additionally, in 2024, red hen launched writing in the schools hq, an on-site summer extension of wits for local middle and high schoolers. In wits hq, students are able to explore poetry, fiction, and creative nonfiction with red hen authors as well as gain in-depth knowledge of the publishing industry from red hen staff. Red hen press uses a data-driven approach to measure the success of the wits program and wits hq. Host teachers and students are polled through pre- and post-workshop surveys. Student evaluations include questions about confidence in writing and vocabulary as well as short-answer questions about interest in poetry, instructor effectiveness, and knowledge of the course content. Host teacher surveys include short-answer questions about student performance, the effectiveness of the curriculum, and the ability of the instructor to tailor their lessons to the students' level of understanding and to incorporate California state educational standards. We utilize qualitative and quantitative survey data, along with staff notes, to make improvements to the program.

Financial Efficiency

• Mission deployment rate: 85.3%; rating input score 85
• Program expense ratio: 70%; rating input score 70
• Fundraising efficiency: $5.5 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 20; 20th 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: Limited
• Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
• Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

• Independent voting board: 89.5%; rating input score 89; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
• Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
  • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
  • Whistleblower policy: Pass
  • Document-retention policy: Pass
  • CEO compensation review process: Pass
  • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
  • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
  • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
  • Audit committee oversight: Missing
  • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

• Operating margin: -8.6%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
• Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.57; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
• Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.14; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
• Officer compensation ratio: 16.2%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

• Program expense growth: 15.6% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
• Revenue growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
• Asset growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings