Els for Autism Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263520396
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Jupiter, FL, USA
Phone
5615986200
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$14,514,147
Expenses
$10,300,494
Assets
$65,238,770
Liabilities
$7,854,358

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DONALD ALLAN JR (PRESIDENT AND CEO)
  • MARLENE SOTELO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARLENE SOTELO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $293,840 total reported compensation
  • YVONNE D'AMELIO (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $235,182 total reported compensation
  • ERIN BROOKER-LOZOTT (PROGRAM DIRECTOR): $175,286 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Els for autism global mission is to transform the lives of people with autism and those who care for them through lifetime services and collaborative partnerships.

What it reported doing in 2025

Els for autism foundation, inc. Was established in 2009 by liezl and ernie els. The els' son, ben, is impacted by the disorder which affects 1 in 31 children in the u.s. The world-class pro golfer and his wife have devoted their efforts to a game-changing, philanthropic undertaking - the els center of excellence. The center is a world-class, 26-acre campus that is home to two distinct nonprofit organizations: els for autism foundation and the learning academy, atuition-free, nonprofit, palm beach county public charter school serving students ages 3-21. The foundation offers innovative, evidence-based programs for families and individuals across the lifespan in three primary impact areas: adult services, recreation services and early intervention and education services. The els for autism foundation serves families around the world, offering programs and services both virtually and in person at the els center of excellence in jupiter, Florida.

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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.4%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 86.1%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 20th 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: 29%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.33; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.4%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.4% of revenue deployed · 86.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $8.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $294K · 17 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.2M reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 35/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.