Advance Innovative Education

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
202557643
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Phone
2255727353
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$235,069
Expenses
$209,818
Assets
$225,483
Liabilities
$126,937

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • REGINALD BROWHOW (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JENNIFER BYNUM EDD (EXECUTIVE DI): $31,677 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote urgent, systemic change in education by undertaking reform initiatives that deliver dramatically improved teacher and school leader performance, and by developing strong partnerships to increase student success and ultimately enhance the quality of life for all.

What it reported doing in 2020

Rlrp - redesign lessons, re-envisioning principles is all about change - professional, personal, educational, and social. Rlrp is a 14-month alternative pathway to principle certification, and of only three state- approved alternative certification programs offered in Louisiana, rlrp is the only one with a statewide focus. Rlrp is truly where business and education principles intersect to develop educational leaders with the entrepreneurial spirit to explore new frontiers and be the impetus of change in education. Our vision is to create educational leaders who possess the courage and skills to change school culture.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 86% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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

SUPPORTED - 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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.6%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 94.8%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.7%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.07; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.56; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.1%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -17.5% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.6% of revenue deployed · 94.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $199K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $32K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 to 2020
  • 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.

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 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.