The Russell Child Development Center Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 480845080
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Garden City, KS, USA
- Phone
- 6202750291
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Children's, Youth Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $6,410,433
- Expenses
- $6,306,905
- Assets
- $7,054,034
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MEGHAN HUBER (PRESIDENT)
- JEFF CRIST (VICE PRESIDENT)
- REBECCA CLANCY (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
Highest reported compensation
- REBECCA CLANCY (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $121,363 total reported compensation
- DANA MCNUTT (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $105,981 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 mission of russell child development center is to lay a foundation of success for all young children and their families through the delivery of high quality, inclusive services.
What it reported doing in 2024
Building blocks projects are based upon a systems approach for improving outcomes for young children and their families. Evidence based practices provide for quality early learning opportunities, essential family and caregiver supports, and adequate provider resources to enhance early literacy and overall child development, family confidence and competence, and community capacity.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 75% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 84
- Accountability: 81
- Sustainability: 50
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 88.1%; rating input score 88
- Program expense ratio: 89.4%; rating input score 89
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 74%; rating input score 74; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 1.6%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.12; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.6%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 88.1% of revenue deployed · 89.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $5.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $121K · 12 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $3.8M reported
- Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.