Science Station

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
421261821
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2010
Forms available
Form 990 2010
Location
Cedar Rapids, IA, USA
Phone
3193660968
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Science and Technology Museums

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$287,351
Expenses
$464,864
Assets
$136,954
Liabilities
$310,262

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To be an innovative science, technology, engineering, and math based learning center providing facilities and programming meant to inspire and stimulate the imagination of the children, families and groups we serve.

What it reported doing in 2010

Science station's summer camp program offers classes to nearly 1,000 young people, creating interest in the fundamentals of science and technology.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 7th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -61.8%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.29; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.27; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $348K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.