Summer Jam Day Camp Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203347478
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2014
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Detroit, MI, USA
Phone
3139950607
Rating
47
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Camps

Reported finances

Revenue
$79,622
Expenses
$68,907
Assets
$129

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARIA ADAMSLAWTONS (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MARIA ADAMSLAWTONS (PRESIDENT)
  • LA TANYA ARCHIE (SECRETARY)
  • CARRIE WRIGHT (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Summer jam day camp provides recdreational , enrichment, educational field tri8p for children for the dity of detroit during the summer months.

What it reported doing in 2014

1. Bus transportation to different sites: camping, theaters, museums, state parks, plays, universities, tec.$4700.00. 2. Field trips to above$6,257.00. 3. T-shirts for togetherness and prides to belong$1,271.00. 4. Camp supplies$1,333.00. 5. Gasoline for

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 94% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 19
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 18.1%; rating input score 18
  • Program expense ratio: 20.9%; rating input score 21

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.5%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -26% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 80.8% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 18.1% of revenue deployed · 20.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $14K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 6 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2010 to 2014
  • 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 18/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part I part ii net assets crosscheck did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.