Eastlake Educational Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330678106
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Chula Vista, CA, USA
Phone
6198618630
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$201,738
Expenses
$243,329
Assets
$1,292,916
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THERESE CABALLES (PRESIDENT)
  • MARY ROSE PERALTA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JANET FRANCIS (PAST EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JANET FRANCIS (PAST EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $80,262 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The organization was established to enrich, enhance, and support the quality of education for students attending the elementary and secondary public schools.

What it reported doing in 2025

Stem Programming, Alumni Programming, Restricted and Unrestricted scholarships

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 66% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 57% for direct work, and 43% for grants.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 78
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 66.9%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.31 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 68.7%; rating input score 69; 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -20.6%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.31; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 33%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86% of revenue deployed · 66.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $163K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $80K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 30 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.