Claude Moore Opportunities

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN: 932591379
IRS 990 coverage: 2024–2025
Forms available: Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2023
Location: Fairfax, VA, USA
Phone: 7039341147
Rating: 62
Verdict: SUPPORTED
Rating confidence: Moderate
Sector: Youth Development N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue: $2,616,435
Expenses: $1,911,049
Assets: $2,035,408
Liabilities: $26,949

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

KAREN G SCHAUFELD (PRESIDENT)
WILLIAM A HAZEL JR (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

WILLIAM A HAZEL JR (CEO): $390,599 total reported compensation
PHILIPPA SARAH MOORE (EMPLOYEE): $178,684 total reported compensation
SHIRLEY J BAZDAR (EMPLOYEE): $158,017 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization was established to meet the needs of residents and employers alike by supporting education, training and programs that prepare individuals regardless of age for meaningful lifelong in high demand jobs across the commonwealth of Virginia.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization worked with a university and a community college to launch a pilot program to tackle the youth mental health crisis by expanding community support, education, and training. Through this pilot, undergraduate participants gain the necessary training and credentials to become registered behavioral health technicians (bht) or qualified mental health professionals (qmhp-t), while also learning how to effectively support youth within their schools and local communities.

Operating model

Revenue model: Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model: Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

Financial Efficiency: 42
Transparency & Controls: 69
Accountability: 92
Sustainability: 57
Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

Mission deployment rate: 40.2%; rating input score 40
Program expense ratio: 53.7%; rating input score 54
Fundraising efficiency: $4.52 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 11th percentile among comparable filings
Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
Foreign activity oversight: Limited
Grant itemization coverage: 64.3%; rating input score 64; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 19th percentile among comparable filings
Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

Operating margin: 27%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.07; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
Officer compensation ratio: 45.2%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

Program expense growth: 45.7% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
Revenue growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Asset growth: 40.6% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

Where the money goes: 40.2% of revenue deployed · 53.7% of spending went to programs
Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1M in reported program spending
Leadership: top reported pay $391K · 10 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $251K reported
Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
Contacts: How to reach this organization
Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
Related organizations: 4 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.

Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 54/100.
High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 13/100.
High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.