Futuro Education San Antonio

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
933261284
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Antonio, TX, USA
Phone
2102012781
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,453,293
Expenses
$1,259,105
Assets
$1,641,380
Liabilities
$695,868

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Daiana Lambrecht (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Daiana Lambrecht (Executive Director): $208,999 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to ensure all San Antonio children have access to an excellent public education and greater prosperity for their futuro (future). See Schedule O

What it reported doing in 2024

Futuro advanced its exempt purpose through three core programs during the reporting period. Through Families Vote, the organization registered over 600 new voters, expanding civic participation among families most impacted by education policy. Through Family Organize, Futuro engaged 320 parent leader families across traditional public, in-district charter, and public charter schools, who conducted 25 direct engagements with local elected officials and candidates to advance education equity and school quality in local policymaking. Through the Future Leaders Academy, launched in Fall 2024, Futuro trained 15 community members to pursue elected office and civic leadership 73% of whom have already stepped into formal roles including school board seats, campaign staff positions, and community commissions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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 total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.7%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 60.8%; rating input score 61
  • Fundraising efficiency: $268.48 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 8th 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: 97.8%; rating input score 98; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.4%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.3; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.42; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 182% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 58.6% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 70.3% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.7% of revenue deployed · 60.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $766K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $209K · 4 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.