Global School Leaders

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
814387783
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
4243358839
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,608,099
Expenses
$2,346,849
Assets
$1,515,237
Liabilities
$361,310

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CAMILA PEREIRA (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • CAMILA PEREIRA (CEO): $137,500 total reported compensation
  • AVNI GUPTA-KAGAN (CHIEF OF STRATEGY & OPERATIONS): $97,440 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To advance the education of children by training and preparing school leaders, teachers, and other educators.

What it reported doing in 2025

Global school leaders (gsl) is redefining what powerful school leadership can do for education systems in the global south through the following programs: global school leaders is redefining what powerful school leadership can do for education systems in the global south through partnerships, research, regional collaboration, and leadership development programs across latin america, africa, and asia. In 2025, gsl advanced a global agenda focused on strengthening school leadership at a systemic lever for improving learning outcomes. Gsl expanded partnerships with governments, local organizations, and regional networks to support contextualized school leadership programs focused on foundational literacy and numeracy, early childhood education, and gender-equitable leadership. In ghana, gsl continued implementation of leadership for learning, a program designed to strengthen instructional leadership practices and improve teaching and learning outcomes. In sierra leone, gsl continued supporting programs focused on foundational literacy and numeracy; while in guatemala, gsl advanced systems-level work through partnerships, a national diagnostic process, and a nationally representative school leader survey.at the regional and global levels, gsl strengthened collaboration and policy dialogue through the latin america and caribbean hub, the southeast asia school leadership hub, and the global technical working group on early childhood education and development leadership. Gsl worked alongside organizations including, unesco, unicef, arnec, acsl, and seames to strengthen school leadership systems and elevate school leadership in global education discussions. Additionally, gsl continues to study how best to support school leaders through studies, surveys, and convenings. In 2025, the annual gsl promoting understanding of leadership in schools ("puls") survey focused on school leaders' experiences with foundational literacy and numeracy across the global south and received 12,453 responses from 16 countries across africa, asia, and latin america.gsl also significantly expanded its work on gender-equitable school leadership. In 2025, gsl supported nine new partner organizations working on gender across the global south, including five organizations selected for the first cohort of the gender-equitable school leadership ("gesl") alliance. Gsl supported the implementation of gender-equitable leadership practices across 110 secondary schools in india, reached more than 1,000 school leaders through gender and leadership research in ghana and kenya, directly supported 48 women school leaders through sheleads, and contributed to four global convenings and publications amplifying women leaders' voices across regions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 87% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.7%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 80.8%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.73 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Pass
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 34th 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: 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: 10%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.65; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.24; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 25.1% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 23% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.9% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.7% of revenue deployed · 80.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $138K · 8 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $479K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.