The Child Language Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
861037966
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Tucson, AZ, USA
Phone
5206228364
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$427,317
Expenses
$569,276
Assets
$748,838
Liabilities
$85,617

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHERYL COLLINS-WILLIAMS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • PATRICIA JIMENEZ (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KAREN ZAKERWSKI (SECRETARY): $29,826 total reported compensation
  • PATRICIA JIMENEZ (PRESIDENT): $15,185 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to benefit children with speech and language disorders through specialized early intervention programs, research to improve language learning, and professional training that links research to clinical practice.

What it reported doing in 2024

The clc's early-intervention programs are designed to give young children access to oral language and learning experiences, which are foundational for successful language, literacy, social-emotional and cognitive development: wings on words (wow) preschool (aug - may) serves up to 72 children, 2-5 years old, with and without speech-language deficits. Approximately 60% of children enrolled require speech-language therapy services, which are embedded into the preschool day using a hybrid service delivery model (individual, small group and classroom-based). Licensed and certified speech-language pathologists on the wow staff plan, implement and supervise the service provision and practicum of up to five graduate student clinicians each semester. In the classroom, the school's early childhood educators have, collectively, an average of 15+ years of experience at wings on words. Their dedication and commitment to the center's mission is at the heart and soul of the program's success. In addition, wow has recently begun employing slp-assistants, who dually serve as classroom instructional aides. This allows for intentional, focused and nearly uninterrupted speech-language facilitation throughout the preschool day. Wow summer camp (may - june) clc's programs began in 1991 with the wow summer camp to meet the demand for speech-language services for preschool-aged children and support slhs treatment research in early childhood language development. The camp continues to be in high demand with wait lists for enrollment typically filled by early april each year. On average, 90% of those enrolled in summer camp require speech-language intervention services, which are provided more intensively (four times per week vs. Two times per week) during the 5-week camp experience. To meet community demand, camp enrollment was expanded in 2014 to include children in k-1st grade, who were struggling new readers. This classroom, called soaring into reading, was expanded again in 2018, to also include children in 2nd grade.statistics signal a continued, and urgently growing need for literacy development programs, like ours, in the community. Children diagnosed with speech-language deficits, and specifically, developmental language disorder (incidence: 1 in 15), are at greater risk for literacy deficits and academic failure.in 2019, only 46% of 3rd graders in pima county were reading at grade level. The ability to read at proficient levels by the end of third grade can significantly impact the trajectory of a student's education. Research from the Ohio department of education found that "students reading proficiently by the end of third grade are five times more successful at achieving college and career readiness as their non-proficient peers." further compelling research from a university of chicago study found that less than 20 percent of students who were reading below grade level attended college, compared to about a third of students who were reading at grade level, and nearly 60 percent of students who were reading above grade level.

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

SUPPORTED - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 53
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 96.7%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 75%; rating input score 75; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -33.2%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.32; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.9%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $551K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $30K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.