East Side Union High School District Education Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264148665
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
San Jose, CA, USA
Phone
4086410342
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$538,965
Expenses
$521,695
Assets
$279,291
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Dan Moser (President)
  • Emanual Barbara (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Parker Singh (Executive Dir.): $40,175 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The East Side Union High School Education Foundation was founded to provide support and enhancement of extracurricular, educational, and athletic opportunities for students in East San Jose, California. Our mission is to promote and create bold and innovative programs, services, and partnerships that measurably elevate sustainable student success.

What it reported doing in 2024

Gear UP- The current GEAR UP program opportunity serves two districts within the ESA, the Franklin McKinley and Alum Rock Union School Districts. These two districts serve a significant proportion of students in the K-8 grades who would be classified as low socioeconomic, English Learners and students of color within the ESA and Santa Clara County at large. Each district has approximately 700 students about to enter grade 8. The goal of the GEAR UP grant is to have students college and career ready by the end of high school.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 66% for direct work, and 34% for grants.
  • 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.2%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 87%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.78 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.1%; rating input score 99; 48th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.2%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.54; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.7%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 42.6% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 29.1% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.1% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.2% of revenue deployed · 87% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $454K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $40K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.