Aapl Educational Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 237243157
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Fort Worth, TX, USA
- Phone
- 8178477700
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $267,233
- Expenses
- $292,171
- Assets
- $5,602,967
- Liabilities
- $54,744
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- R DIRK VANDERPLOEGG II (IMMEDIATE PAST 3RD VICE PRESIDENT (End: 06/25))
- William E Hackett CPL (3RD VICE PRESIDENT (End: 06/25))
Highest reported compensation
- LE'ANN CALLIHAN (EXECUTIVE VP & COO): $393,988 total reported compensation
- PAUL HARRISON (CFO): $232,732 total reported compensation
- GRETA ZEIMETZ (Former Officer): $132,041 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 educational foundation was formed for the purpose of 1. Promoting education, instruction and training for members to improve or develop their capabilities, 2. Instruct the public on subjects useful to individuals and beneficial to the community, 3. Further the advancement of education and 4. Support other charitable purposes, such as natural disaster relief for members.
What it reported doing in 2024
To Provide assistance to promote education for the members of AAPL and the general public. Grants for promoting education, instruction, and training for members to improve or develop their capabilities - $118,913 Grants to further the advancement of education - $78,970 Grants for instructing the public on subjects useful to individuals - $30,615 Grants for disaster relief - $2,500
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Investment-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
- 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 82
- Transparency & Controls: 68
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 46
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 79.1%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th 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: 96.4%; rating input score 96; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- 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: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -9.3%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 19.18; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 27.4%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -2.9% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 79.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $231K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $394K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 7 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.