Carlsbad Educational Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
953768448
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Carlsbad, CA, USA
Phone
7609291555
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,775,701
Expenses
$6,585,072
Assets
$5,293,475
Liabilities
$618,074

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LAURA PITTS (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • LAURA PITTS (CEO): $215,194 total reported compensation
  • TAYLOR BEVERIDGE (DIR OF PHIL): $121,047 total reported compensation
  • MANDY MCKNIGHT (DIR OF FINANCE): $112,277 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide increased educational opportunities for all students in the carlsbad unified school district by developing and funding impactful programs.

What it reported doing in 2024

The carlsbad educational foundation is a non-profit organization dedicated to supporting and enhancing the educational experience for students in the carlsbad unified school district (cusd). Through fundraising efforts and community engagement, the foundation aims to provide additional resources, programs, and opportunities that contribute to the overall quality of education in carlsbad. Their initiatives often focus on areas such as music, art, science, and innovation, enriching the learning environment for students. In addition, the foundation operates kids care, a before and after school licensed childcare program throughout cusd.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 87% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 76% for direct work, and 24% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 87.5%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.04 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.8%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.8; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.8%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.2% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83% of revenue deployed · 87.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $215K · 20 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Board meeting minutes documented not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.