Choose to Succeed
Legal name: Choose to Succeed Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 383892964
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2018
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2018
- Location
- San Antonio, TX, US
- Phone
- 2102252243
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $328,359
- Expenses
- $403,700
- Assets
- $1,701,188
- Liabilities
- $183,724
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CHRISTOPHER HAASS (PRESIDENT/CEO)
- REBECCA BRUNE - SAAFND (PRESIDENT/COO)
Highest reported compensation
- REBECCA BRUNE - SAAFND (PRESIDENT/COO): $303,056 total reported compensation
- LYNDA CABELL - SAAFND (CFO): $220,717 total reported compensation
- ARENDA BURNS - SAAFND (VP OF HR & ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT): $171,079 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Ensuring every San Antonio family has access to a high-performing school, regardless of their zip code.
What it reported doing in 2018
Ongoing high-quality school support - choose to succeed supports the growth of high-quality schools in san antonio through strategic investments and thought partnership. To date, the organization has enabled 22,510 students to enroll in high quality schools for the 2018-2019 school year. The goal is to serve 60,000 san antonio public school students by 2026.building local and national awareness - choose to succeed works with local and national organizations to drive the awareness of and broad participation in the high-quality school growth initiatives in san antonio.in-kind revenue received during the year in the amount of $56,892.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 42% for direct work, and 58% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 93
- Transparency & Controls: 83
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 32
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 85.1%; rating input score 85
- Fundraising efficiency: $74.02 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: -22.9%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.21; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 53.8%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -47.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -28.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -10.1% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 85.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $344K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $303K · 14 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2014 to 2018
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 20 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.