Cooperative for Education

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311545464
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Cincinnati, OH, USA
Phone
5136617000
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$16,823,208
Expenses
$4,137,372
Assets
$19,669,576
Liabilities
$2,120,905

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOSEPH BERNINGER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOSEPH BERNINGER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $133,088 total reported compensation
  • LIZA O'NEAL (CORPORATE TREASURER): $91,823 total reported compensation
  • ABIGAIL GAIDE (CORPORATE SECRETARY): $75,636 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide educational improvement services and other charitable services to financially stressed communities and education institutions and educate north americans about guatemala, its poverty and educational services.

What it reported doing in 2025

Coed's technology program provides middle and high-school youth with badly-needed digital literacy training that positions them with necessary tech skills for future employment or further education, primarily by establishing computer centers in rural middle schools that lack the resources to enable students to compete for higher-paying jobs. 57 coed computer centers (including 1 established in 2025, serving 122 students) help to bridge the digital divide in rural guatemala by providing high-quality technology training to 13,934 students. An innovative sustainability model enables schools to upgrade their equipment on a planned replacement schedule with money saved in their revolving funds.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 83% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 45
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 96
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 20.7%; rating input score 21
  • Program expense ratio: 79.4%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $28.69 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 22nd 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: 75.4%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.75; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.3%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 20.7% of revenue deployed · 79.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 14 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $3.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $133K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 21/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.