Evaluation and Training Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237396648
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2018, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
3104738367
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$825,020
Expenses
$775,950
Assets
$4,549,037
Liabilities
$25,108

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JON HOBBS (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • JON HOBBS (President): $217,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Provides programs and evaluations for educational projects principally for governmental and quasi-governmental agencies.

What it reported doing in 2024

Eir rural upstart: the evaluation and training institute (eti) was contracted to conduct a study of an early literacy program supported by a grant from the office of innovation and improvement in the u.s. Department of education. Eti will conduct a five-year presechool evaluation (2019-2024) starting with Idaho, North Dakota, and Wyoming in summer 2019 and beginning in South Dakota and Montana in summer 2020. Participating children will complete a school readiness assessment that covers areas such as letter and word recognition, reading comprehension, and phonological processing. Eti will present the findings to a national audience of early literacy experts, educators and parents seeking to improve children's school readiness at entrance into kindergarten.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 80% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 program spending has grown recently. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 55
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.4%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 66.8%; rating input score 67
  • 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.9%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.86; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 28%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.7% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58.4% of revenue deployed · 66.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $518K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $217K · 4 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.