Education Quality Outcomes Standards Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
821345679
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023, Form 990-N 2018
Location
Boston, MA, USA
Phone
6177284446
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$149,333
Expenses
$40,427
Assets
$149,333
Liabilities
$40,427

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEPHEN YADZINKSI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • MARIA FLYNN (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARIA FLYNN (CEO): $757,395 total reported compensation
  • STEPHEN YADZINKSI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $332,014 total reported compensation
  • TAMESHIA BRIDGES MANSFIELD (DIRECTOR): $304,562 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Despite there being more than a million credentials to choose from in the u.s., there is little guidance on which ones offer the greatest return on investment for workers and employers. Our mission is to bring clarity to the ndc landscape by creating a first-of-its-kind, universal signal of quality that does not rely on data collected by providers, but instead uses real workers' outcomes before and after they attain ndcs. By providing comprehensive data on ndc quality and deploying tangible tools to activate this information, we can empower millions of u.s. Workers to translate skills into better jobs.

What it reported doing in 2023

We help post secondary providers collect and report realworld outcomes data in order to establish consistent quality assurance standards across education and training programs. Eqos has developed a robust quality assurance framework and approach for education and training providers. Today, the framework is being piloted in Colorado, Indiana, and New Jersey. In addition to creating and defining the metrics for our five outcomes standard categories, we assist individual education providers in understanding the framework and provide technical assistance in the actual collection and reporting of the outcomes data. We also assist state governments and policymakers in understanding the results and using the framework to incentivize the identification and scaling of education programs that have measurable realworld successes in training or retraining vulnerable populations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 42
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 23.7%; rating input score 24
  • Program expense ratio: 87%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 72.9%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.69; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 497.4%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -38.5% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -36% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -20.4% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 23.7% of revenue deployed · 87% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $35K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $757K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 24/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.