St Elizabeth's Day Home
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 941683870
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2014
- Forms available
- Form 990 2014
- Location
- San Jose, CA, USA
- Phone
- 4082953456
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Child Day Care
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,370,611
- Expenses
- $2,401,958
- Assets
- $3,478,892
- Liabilities
- $3,694,375
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MARISSA SERPA (PRESIDENT)
- NICOLE MORENO-DENZIER (VICE PRESIDENT)
- DIANNA J BALLESTEROS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- DIANNA J BALLESTEROS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $101,124 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide quality day care to working families.
What it reported doing in 2014
The day home provides quality day care to working families with a focus on education in a home-like environment and helps in assisting parents with their responsibilities through supportive services.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 89
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 25
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 85.3%; rating input score 85
- Fundraising efficiency: $12.57 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 15th 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: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -75.2%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.45; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.06; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.2%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 85.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $101K · 16 people listed
- Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.