Coalition of Essential Schools Northwest

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311652434
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2012
Forms available
Form 990 2012
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2068186896
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$531,130
Expenses
$517,622
Assets
$301,040
Liabilities
$28,254

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

An educational design and implementation group that partners with schools and school districts to provide technical services in order to make powerful learning a reality for all students.

What it reported doing in 2012

College Spark Grant - Bellingham School District: Provide instructional coaching and professional development to secondary schools and alternative program. Approx 100 teachers, 12 support staff and 5 school administrators received training.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 85% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 2.5%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.58; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.7%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -32.3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -27.5% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $432K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $71K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2009 to 2012
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.