El Paso Community Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
741839536
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
El Paso, TX, USA
Phone
9155334020
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Community Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$20,003,678
Expenses
$20,223,645
Assets
$87,707,604
Liabilities
$33,101,634

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

Leadership & pay

36 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Richard E Pearson (President / CEO)
  • Stephanie L Otero (Vice President)
  • Kathrin Berg (Vice President)
  • Carmen M Vargas (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Richard E Pearson (President / CEO): $448,535 total reported compensation
  • Hector Villegas (VP COMM. DEVELOP.,): $300,953 total reported compensation
  • Stephanie L Otero (Vice President): $241,406 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To establish charitable funds. To provide a vehicle for donors' varied interests. To promote local philanthropy. To provide leadership and resources in addressing local challenges and opportunities.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Teacher Pipeline Fund supports the work of an El Paso Teacher Preparation community of Practice created to ensure an equitable education system that meets the needs of all students in the region. The goal is for 100% of new teachers hired by districts in the El Paso region must be trained in sustainable, high-quality programs, and those teachers must be effective and retained. The initiative includes four strategic areas: recruitment into the profession, high quality teacher preparation programs, a year-long paid residency, and early career teacher mentorship.

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 51% for direct work, and 49% 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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 92
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 90.3%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.06 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th 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: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.2%; rating input score 98; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.1%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.34; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.3%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.2% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 90.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 27 of 27 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $18.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $449K · 36 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $554K reported
  • Consistency: 39 of 40 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 120 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 135 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.

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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.