The Imagine Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
812316926
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Tukwila, WA, USA
Phone
2064925249
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Children's, Youth Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$16,836,308
Expenses
$10,825,583
Assets
$16,822,676
Liabilities
$2,457,293

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Karen Hart (Board Member/President)
  • Cate Bridenstine (Chief Executive Officer)

Highest reported compensation

  • Cate Bridenstine (Chief Executive Officer): $204,630 total reported compensation
  • Laura Tanzy (Board Member): $43,495 total reported compensation
  • Dora Herrera (Board Member): $16,615 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 create community relationships and innovative early learning programs that empower people, caring every day for every generation. Our vision is to support affordable, high-quality care for every child in Washington State by building an accessible and strong professional development system that elevates and improves the lives of child care providers and professionals.

What it reported doing in 2024

IMAGINE U: Imagine U is a relationship-based mentorship program designed to increase the number of licensed family child care providers who can care for children in Washington State. Imagine U pairs experienced and talented licensed child care providers with those interested in becoming licensed, and offers both the mentor and intern support to help them grow professionally. As interns progress through the program, they complete assignments such as cost benefit analyses, budgets, program policies and practice licensing visits while also working 20 hours per month in their mentor's child care facilities. At the conclusion of the program, successful participants receive a bonus to invest in their child care businesses. Imagine U's peer-to-peer model honors the knowledge and skill that exists in the field and helps ensure that new providers can benefit from their mentor's expertise.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 86% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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 total spending goes to programs and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 89.8%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 35.7%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.55; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.5%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20.2% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 22.7% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 29.9% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58% of revenue deployed · 89.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $9.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $205K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $538K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.