The Neediest Kids Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 237309991
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2013–2013
- Forms available
- Form 990 2012, Form 990-EZ 2013
- Location
- Bethesda, MD, USA
- Phone
- 3013654440
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $6,111
- Expenses
- $832,556
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
People named in this filing
- DR JC HAYWARD (DIRECTOR)
- DEBBIE BEHNKE (DIRECTOR)
- ALEX R M BOYLE (DIRECTOR)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The neediest kids provides assistance to disadvantaged youth throughout the Washington, dc metropolitan area in collaboration with local school systems. The organization provides grants and resources to help children with immediate needs, meals, transportation, eyeglasses, clothing, school supplies and other essential items and services.
What it reported doing in 2013
School and student assistance - coordinated merchandise donations from manufacturers, retailers and other business sponsors. Distributed children's clothing, shoes, toys, and school supplies. Neediest kids also provided approximately $450,000 of in-kind donations to at-risk children through its partnerships with k.i.d.s.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 83
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 7
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 54.1%; rating input score 54
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -13,523.9%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: -48.9% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -64.3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 54.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $450K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 11 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 54/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.