Fort Worth Education Partnership Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
850658869
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Fort Worth, TX, USA
Phone
6189748441
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,238,805
Expenses
$6,427,164
Assets
$12,135,712
Liabilities
$43,380

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRENT BEASLEY (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRENT BEASLEY (President): $300,427 total reported compensation
  • LEILA SANTILLAN (VP OPERATIONS): $217,368 total reported compensation
  • JOHAMNA HERNANDEZ (DIR OF ORG.): $153,806 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We believe that every fort worth area student deserves the opportunity to have access to high-quality education. In pursuit of this, fort worth education partnership's mission is to support, invest in, and coordinate opportunities that increase access to high-quality educational experiences.

What it reported doing in 2024

1. School Growth: Supported high-quality school operators in Fort Worth to grow and serve more students. 2. Advocacy: Supported local advocacy and informational efforts aimed at ensuring parents and civic leaders have access to information about how students are doing academically and that parent voices are uplifted in local conversations about education. 3. Talent: Supported the growth of teacher residency and strategic staffing initiatives.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 48% for direct work, and 52% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.5%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 95.5%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.8%; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -3%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.89; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.8%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 41.1% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 19.8% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 29.5% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.5% of revenue deployed · 95.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $300K · 9 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $1.1M reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 18 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 13 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.