Florida Korean School Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263399448
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Winter Garden, FL, USA
Phone
8137678505
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,571
Expenses
$8,172
Assets
$10,796

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • INAE CHUN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • INAE CHUN (PRESIDENT)
  • EUNHEE JUNG (VICE PRESIDE)
  • HYEEUN KIM (VICE PRESIDE)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

In order to support many korean heritage language schools in the Florida area of U.S.a., the company was organized and is helping korean lanuage schools in the states of Florida. Teachers training, arts festival, korean language contest, writing contest, and translation contest, etc. Are managed by the organization.

What it reported doing in 2024

Writing contest in celebration of korean language day to inspire young students with korean language and culture.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 69% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 78.7%; rating input score 79

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.9%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.32; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.7% per year; rating input score 0; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6% per year; rating input score 0; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85% of revenue deployed · 78.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $6K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 33/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.