The Children's House of Washington

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521224438
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2012
Forms available
Form 990 2012
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Kindergarten, Preschool, Nursery School, Early Admissions

Reported finances

Revenue
$267,693
Expenses
$296,746
Assets
$139,477
Liabilities
$10,000

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To offer pre-schollers a safe, nurturing enviorment in which to begin their educational life at school in a classroom that reflects the world at large with a multi-ethnic, multi-racial, economically diverse population.

What it reported doing in 2012

Educational Child Facility to promote Diversity

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 87% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 90
  • Accountability: 54
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: -10.9%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.47; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23%; rating input score 17; 17th 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: 3 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $273K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $68K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules
  • 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.

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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.