Clayton Education Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 431708881
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2022
- Forms available
- Form 990 2022
- Location
- Saint Louis, MO, USA
- Phone
- 3148546044
- Rating
- 57
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Private Grantmaking Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $117,916
- Expenses
- $186,832
- Assets
- $600,616
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Alex Berger III (Director and President)
- Kyle Hogan (Vice President/Director)
People named in this filing
- Alex Berger III (Director and President)
- Kyle Hogan (Vice President/Director)
- Bruce Abrams (Treasurer/Director)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Clayton Education Foundation advances the Clayton Sch Dist culture of academic excellence and helps students reach their full potential by funding classroom initiatives, providing access to edu opportunities and promoting alumni connections
What it reported doing in 2022
The Clayton Education Foundation (CEF) funds programs that provide innovative learning experiences for students in each of our six schools, including: - Teacher Innovation Grants that enable our teachers to try new materials and methods in the classroom that can't be funded by the District. - The Rick Beard Endowment Fund supports STEM initiatives in the District, such as hotspots for families lacking internet access. This allows students to complete homework and conduct research, as well as communicate with teachers and peers. -Purchased new books for three elementary school libraries. -Tutoring for elementary students who qualify for free and reduced lunch
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
MIXED - Most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 59
- Transparency & Controls: 58
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 72.2%; rating input score 72
- Program expense ratio: 44%; rating input score 44
- Fundraising efficiency: $9.24 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 80%; rating input score 80; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 19th 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -58.4%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.21; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -26.3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -49% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -20.6% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 72.2% of revenue deployed · 44% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $82K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 15 of 17 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2018 to 2022
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 44/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 36/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.