Loading…
Loading…
Alabama · Nonprofit
KATE DUNCAN SMITH DAR SCHOOL (Alabama) is funded by 5 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $94,683 in grants to it, the largest being NATIONAL SOCIETY OF THE DAUGHTERS OF THE ($44,163). 3 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
KATE DUNCAN SMITH DAR SCHOOL runs a healthier operating margin than three-quarters of the 20,012 education nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 20,012 education nonprofits $100k–$1M, FY2024
Revenue, expenses and net assets — each indexed to 100 at its first filing year, so you read the trajectory, not the magnitude. The shaded band is where the middle 50% of its peers' revenue would sit, given their growth.
The funding model — what share of revenue comes from contributions, programs, investments and other sources — and whether it's shifting.
13% of KATE DUNCAN SMITH DAR SCHOOL’s revenue is contributions — about as donation-reliant as the typical peer (55% for the typical peer).
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 1 of the last 5 reported years ran a deficit.
The base broadened — 1 funders to 2 as grant income moved $5k → $16k.
4 of 5 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 53% of grant dollars received. That money is really individual donors directing a sponsor; the institutions to cultivate are the non-DAF funders.
From the IRS filings of KATE DUNCAN SMITH DAR SCHOOL’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation.
KATE DUNCAN SMITH DAR SCHOOL leans on a few funders — its largest provides 47% of grant income and the top three 85%; half comes from just 2 funders.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 2 funders to its left
Largest funder’s share by year: 2017 100% · 2021 47% · 2022 52% · 2023 76% · 2024 69% — diversifying over time.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
KATE DUNCAN SMITH DAR SCHOOL draws 73% of its grant income from funders outside Alabama — its reputation reaches beyond the state, across 3 states in all.
In-state vs out-of-state, by year
Grantmakers that don’t fund you yet, surfaced two ways: they back organizations that share your funders, or their grantees resemble your mission. The ones both signals agree on come first. Your 5 funders put you under-funded among the 400 organizations that share them.
From the co-funder graph (funders backing at least two comparable organizations, shrunk for grantee count, donor-advised and mega-funds excluded) and the universe embeddings. A research starting point; overlap is association, not a guarantee of fit.
Nonprofits whose mission and program text most resemble this one, by semantic similarity over the universe of US filings — the closest peers, and often the clearest route to shared or prospective funders.
Read directly from this organization’s own Form 990, as neutral context.
81% of spending goes to programs.
Operates in 1 state
Part of a family of 1 related entity
Every figure is read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML — this organization’s own return for FY2024 (financials across 2020–2024), and the filings of 5funders that report grants to it. “On record” means captured in the filings we have parsed — a funder that does not e-file, or whose grant detail is not itemized, will not appear. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind. view filing