Design Challenge Network Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 921635175
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Portsmouth, NH, USA
- Phone
- 6038485071
- Rating
- 68
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Educational Services and Schools - Other
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $54,405
- Expenses
- $34,756
- Assets
- $55,715
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Lindley Shulz (President)
- Lee Schroeder (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Brentnall M Powell (Executive Dir.)
- Lindley Shulz (President)
- Lee Schroeder (Vice President)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Transform teaching and learning through real-world, project-based design challenges.
What it reported doing in 2024
Design Challenge - an educational program for high teachers and students in which the students identify a problem, design a new solution to address it, create a paper and video, and defend their work in front of a panel of judges as they compete against other students. We had 13 teachers and 137 students participate last year. We provide training, curriculum, classroom visits, and materials, and we run and host live events that took place in three different locations in NH in 2025, two public high schools and the University of New Hampshire.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 49
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 64
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 40.3%; rating input score 40
- Program expense ratio: 63.1%; rating input score 63
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 36.1%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.6; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 40.3% of revenue deployed · 63.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $22K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.