Reed Foundation for Autism Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 812683921
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- Oakland, NJ, USA
- Phone
- 2019042552
- Rating
- 70
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Health
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,135,177
- Expenses
- $1,409,771
- Assets
- $1,378,359
- Liabilities
- $269,596
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CHANTELLE WALKER (CEO)
- KEN NICHOLAS (vice president)
Highest reported compensation
- CHANTELLE WALKER (CEO): $278,459 total reported compensation
- MICHELE MANLEY (CFO): $221,833 total reported compensation
- ROY PARK (CHIEF PEOPLE & CULTURE OFFICER): $167,590 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 reed foundation for autism addresses challenges, and helps conquer the complexities, faced by people on the autism spectrum throughout their lifetime. Our goal is to maximize the impact of charitable giving to improve education, employment, housing, and community opportunities, and enact positive social change, for individuals with autism.
What it reported doing in 2024
Advance public awareness of autism and support programs that benefit individuals with autism throughout their lifetime.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 61% for direct work, and 39% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 56
- Transparency & Controls: 73
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 22
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 67%; rating input score 67
- Program expense ratio: 53.8%; rating input score 54
- Fundraising efficiency: $3.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- 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: 96.5%; rating input score 96; 44th 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: 9 of 9 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -24.2%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.98; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 16%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 14.4% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 67% of revenue deployed · 53.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $758K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $278K · 12 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 29 of 31 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 7 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 54/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 10/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.