Blue Pacific Educational Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
844557532
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2021
Forms available
Form 990 2021
Location
Oceanside, CA, USA
Phone
7602076034
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Kindergarten, Preschool, Nursery School, Early Admissions

Reported finances

Revenue
$74,014
Expenses
$469,242
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • BLANCA LEON (Director): $51,000 total reported compensation
  • JACK ANDERSON (Direc/Bd Pres): $33,750 total reported compensation
  • MARTY MONTOGOMERY (Direc/Treasurer): $12,800 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

It was the mission of bpef for the school, the family and the community to become the catalist for student growth and learning through the use of local community resources, technology and tutoring. It was also the goal of bpef to provide english language learners the opportunity to build their english language skills as a family. Bpef was created to help strengthen neighborhood goals for education through quality home school support.

What it reported doing in 2021

It was the mission of bpef for the school, the family and the community to become the catalist for student growth and learning through the use of local community resources, technology and tutoring. It was also the goal of bpef to provide english language learners the opportunity to build their english language skills as a family. The bpef charter was created to help strengthen neighborhood goals for education through quality home school support. The foundation has now been dissolved and all of its remaining assets contributed to qualifying entities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 63% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 65
  • Sustainability: 6
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 76.6%; rating input score 77
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -534%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.3%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 96.1% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.8% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 76.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $360K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $51K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2019 to 2021
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.