Web Dubois Learning Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
431225401
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Kansas City, MO, USA
Phone
8163098782
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$634,887
Expenses
$439,751
Assets
$702,736
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TAMARA SYKES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • TAMARA SYKES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $100,046 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Raise the academic performance level of underserved communities in the Kansas City, Missouri metropolitan area through educational services and applied state-of-the-art techology.

What it reported doing in 2024

At the W.E.B. DuBois Learning Center, we pride ourselves on our personalized approach to education, where each students unique needs and learning styles are taken into account to create a tailored and effective program for success. All of our educational services are provided free of charge and cater to students from Kindergarten to 12th grade. Additionally, we offer technology literacy services for adults. Our sessions are available on a first come, first served basis, depending on the availability of our volunteer pool. Our core sessions of Reading and STEM subjects each span 90 minutes and occur weekly. Up to five students will be paired with a volunteer coach/mentor based on their grade level. Our programming is powered by a team of culturally competent community professionals who contribute unmatched expertise and quality to our programming. Our coaches/mentors reside, work, and engage within the same neighborhoods as the students we support. Their dedication as volunteers has upheld our mission throughout the years.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 78% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 75% for direct work, and 25% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.6%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 77.4%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $22.8 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

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: Limited
  • 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: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 30.7%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.6; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.8%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.6% of revenue deployed · 77.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $340K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $100K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.