The English Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942416184
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Oakland, CA, USA
Phone
5108366700
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,662,494
Expenses
$1,919,257
Assets
$332,159
Liabilities
$347,648

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Seena D Clark (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • John Tang (Executive Dir.): $75,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the English Center is to realize the participation of international women and men in the social, political and economic opportunities of the 21st century world. Through English language, technology and career readiness training, we will foster cross-cultural communication and career advancement, enabling non-native speakers of English to achieve their fullest potential.

What it reported doing in 2015

The significant events for fiscal 2015-2016 include the following:1. The creation of a partnership with Monument Impact and the opening of the Pittsburg English Center Office.2. The creation of the partnership with the Stride Center and the approval of the "Career Readiness Program - Information Technology" program by ACCET, the BPPE and the US Department of Education.3. The creation of partnerships with various local agencies to enhance referral source for the CRP program. These partnerships include: the Spanish Speaking Citizens' Foundation, Lao Family Community Development, and the International Rescue Committee.4. 10 foreign agents were signed to contract to assist with foreign students recruitment.5. MOUs were signed with potential program partners in Korea and China

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 68% 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.

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: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 87.4%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -15.4%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.17; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.05; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.9%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.8% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -42.9% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $75K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2013 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.