Council on Regional Economic Exp & Educational Development Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
814516730
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
El Paso, TX, USA
Phone
9153517077
Rating
46
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$526,300
Expenses
$17,588
Assets
$3,647,571
Liabilities
$4,195,563

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • EDUARDO RODRIGUEZ (EXEC DIR/SEC/TR): $199,063 total reported compensation
  • NADIA TELLEZ (CHOOSE TO EXCEL DI): $137,751 total reported compensation
  • MANUEL SOTO JR (Director): $81,620 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Lead efforts to identify and support initiatives that improve college readiness and ensure more students graduate with a college degree or certification. Partner with education leaders, funders, and regional, state, and national organizations to develop the next generation educational system for el paso.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provide initial startup costs and expenses associated with the expansion of the idea public schools system in el paso, tx, aiding in formation, recruitment of teachers, and affiliated organizing expenses. 2017 grant in the amount of $6,812,400 will be paid out over seven years, potentially aiding in opening 20 schools with projected enforllment of 14,000 students by 2023. The total paid through 2023 is $4,123,265. Paid $375,000 of $2.25 grant to harmony public schools for expansion in el paso, bringing total paid to $750,000. Provided $62,134 in support of parent engagement/knowledge initiatives. Generated support for additional and targeted scholarship programs focused on specific career development opportunities, as in the case of attracting more high performing students to the teaching profession, as well as continuing to encourage students, also through scholarship awards, to pursue a bachelors degree in an in demand occupation or career. Also, through a stipend support program, engage teachers during the summer months with employers to expose both teachers and employers to the requirements of the employer, in terms of skills, and the means that teaching those skills can be enhanced in the classroom and through the curriculum. Through various sponsorships, the effort has been to bring attention to expanding opportunities in various fields for all underrepresented students including young women.

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 77% for direct work, and 23% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 35
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 49
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 3.3%; rating input score 3
  • Program expense ratio: 99.3%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 96.7%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 207.39; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.15; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -29.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -35.1% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 3.3% of revenue deployed · 99.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 8 board members independent · 1 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $17K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $199K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 3/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.