The Child Care Consortium Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
351872978
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Michigan City, IN, USA
Phone
2198744288
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Child Day Care

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,400,359
Expenses
$3,270,519
Assets
$1,088,989
Liabilities
$411,991

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JANICE E KATZ PHD (PRESIDENT)
  • BETH LUNCSFORD (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • IRIS VILLOCH (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • THERESA ARGUETA (DIRECTOR): $70,855 total reported compensation
  • LISA RUSSELL (DIRECTOR OF HEAD START): $44,135 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of child care consortium, inc. Is to increase access to high quality early childhood education and care for all children in the community, to improve the quality of early childhood education and care throughout the community and to increase public awareness about the importance of the early childhood experience.

What it reported doing in 2018

Operate head start preschool program for 217 children at four sites in laporte county, Indiana. Head start is a program of the united states department of health and human services that provides comprehensive early childhood education, health, nutrition, and parent involvement services to low-income children and their families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 69% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 95.8%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 3.8%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.33; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.5%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92% of revenue deployed · 95.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $3.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $71K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2016 to 2018
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.