Dreams for Schools

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
364683422
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Santa Ana, CA, USA
Phone
4082158578
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Dance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$760,831
Expenses
$926,670
Assets
$1,158,494
Liabilities
$22,025

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NITHIN JILLA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • NITHIN JILLA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/CEO): $125,021 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Help inspire, create and educate students to be steam/stem literate. These activities help fulfill its exempt purpose of working with young people in k-12 education system by exposing them to careers in steam/stem and provide them with more opportunities in steam/stem.

What it reported doing in 2025

K-8 steam afterschool and community programming delivered through partnerships with school districts, boys and girls clubs, public libraries, and community-based organizations across southern California. Dreams for schools implements hands-on coding, robotics, engineering, and app development classes that span the k-8 pipeline to fill gaps in steam programming for students in underserved communities, exposing them to careers in technology and engineering. The organization also hosts student showcases where youth present their work to community audiences, building confidence, communication skills, and a sense of accomplishment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.6%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 77.4%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $18.1 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -21.8%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.25; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.5%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.6% of revenue deployed · 77.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $718K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $125K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.