Urban Sprouts Child Development Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
611753198
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
University City, MO, USA
Phone
3149972259
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Child Day Care

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,294,173
Expenses
$3,726,371
Assets
$8,500,883
Liabilities
$3,465,194

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ELLICIA LANIER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ELLICIA LANIER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $190,883 total reported compensation
  • JOSEPH SAUNDERS (CHIEF OF STRATEGY & ADVANCEMENT): $105,000 total reported compensation
  • ANDREA BARRAGAN (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $101,459 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Urban sprouts is a joyful, diverse, and inclusive educational community that honors and empowers every aspect of children's learning, our goal is to support each child in his or her development as a socially capable, crative, and inspired citizen.

What it reported doing in 2024

Urban sprouts programs are project based learning programs that build social, emotional, physical, and cognitive skills of pre-kindergarten children. At urban sprouts, primary efforts are made to ensure that all children feel personally known and included, and that his or her presence contributes fundamentally to the urban sprouts school community. Children feel important and valued when others listen, seek out their ideas, and allow them to express themselves. When students feel safe, cared for and valued, they take healthy risks required to tackle the tasks that strenghten their cognitive abilities as well as their social and physical abilities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 62% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 45.9%; rating input score 46
  • Program expense ratio: 64.5%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.14 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th 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: 95.2%; rating input score 95; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 29.6%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.28; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.41; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.7%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 22.1% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 42.8% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 45.9% of revenue deployed · 64.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $191K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 46/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.