Dekalb County Public Schools

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
581843454
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2012
Forms available
Form 990 2012
Location
Stone Mountain, GA, USA
Phone
6788752032
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$15
Expenses
$80,848
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

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

Overview

Mission

The dekalb county public schools foundation exists to serve and strengthen the dekalb county school district in its pursuit of high levels of academic achievement for all students.

What it reported doing in 2012

The dekalb county public school foundation provides funds & property for use by dekalb county Georgia schools for charitable & educational purposes. The foundation also recognizes the achievements of those people affiliated with the school system who contribute to the improvement and betterment of education within dekalb county.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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: 93
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 8
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: -538,886.7%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -65.5% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -97.9% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $77K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 12 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2010 to 2012
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.