E2 Educational Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
912090263
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2020
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Issaquah, WA, USA
Phone
4252601415
Rating
93
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Reported finances

Revenue
$136,541
Expenses
$168,306
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$26,198

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THOMAS GOETSCH (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • THOMAS GOETSCH (PRESIDENT)
  • RICK GAUTIER (SECRETARY)
  • THOMAS LYSTER (BOARD CHAIR)

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 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

E2 educational services exists to develop leaders capable of renewing their nations through the process of educational partnerships in central asia, including kazakhstan, kyrgyzstan, tajikistan, and uzbekistan. E2 educational services works through a network of partnerships with universities, high schools, governments, and other educational non-profits, teaching a curriculum of american business, technology, and leadership.

What it reported doing in 2020

Partnership building: building partnership network of churches, educational institutions, corporations, organizations and individual professionals for furthering the work of e2. Educational development: supporting the development needs of foreign universities, high schools, and young professionals. Currently we are developing necessary tools and curriculum to meet the needs of central asia young leaders at multiple levels.

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 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

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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 95
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 5
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 86.5%; rating input score 87

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: -23.3%; rating input score 6; 6th 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: 34.2%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.9% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 86.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $146K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.