The Corps Network

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521480202
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2027376272
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$15,749,361
Expenses
$17,585,621
Assets
$6,236,993
Liabilities
$4,037,374

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mary Ellen Sprenkel (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Mary Ellen Sprenkel (President & CEO): $289,393 total reported compensation
  • Evelyn Walker (COO): $219,749 total reported compensation
  • Ellen D Owen (Director of Government Relations): $158,735 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Corps Network provides critical leadership to the Corps movement and our nations service and conservation corps as they harness the power of youth and young adults to tackle some of Americas greatest challenges and transform their own lives.

What it reported doing in 2024

Services to National Service Programs: The Corps Network administers federally funded national service and conservation programs including AmeriCorps State and National awards and cooperative agreements with the U.S. Departments of Agriculture, Interior, Energy, and Commerce. The Corps Network sub-awards program funds to member Corps and partner organizations nationwide and provides grant administration, , compliance monitoring, training, and technical assistance to those subrecipients in support of youth and young adult service, workforce development, and land and water conservation projects.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 90% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 74% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 98
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 14
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 95.3%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $616.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 97.8%; rating input score 98; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -11.7%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.35; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.65; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.9%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 95.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $16.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $289K · 26 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $563K reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 36 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 76 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 69 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule G fundraiser detail did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.