Grapevine-colleyville Isd Education Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
752756537
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Grapevine, TX, USA
Phone
8172515480
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$370,679
Expenses
$408,532
Assets
$2,778,017
Liabilities
$118,759

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LISA PARDO (Vice President)
  • KIM FARBISZ (PRESIDENT ELECT)
  • RACHAEL ABELL (Vice President)
  • DEWAYNE SMART (Vice President)
  • KAREN DEAKIN (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • JANE RICHARDS thru 1224 (Executive Dir.): $78,583 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To generate and distribute resources to the Grapevine-Colleyville Independent School District for programs and projects that enhance the quality of education and opportunities for students.

What it reported doing in 2024

Grants are awarded to teachers for classroom, school or district-wide projects within GCISD, and scholarships are awarded to graduating GCISD seniors. Teacher grants are funded by annual campaign donations, net proceeds from special events, and donor-designated contributions. Scholarships are funded by permanent endowments or donor-designated contributions. Teacher grant proposals and student applications are evaluated by volunteer committees of Board members and community volunteers. In addition, the Foundation hosts two special events: a luncheon to welcome newly-hired teachers, and an Academic Recognition Banquet honoring top-ranked graduating seniors, distinguished teachers, and the GCISD teachers and paraprofessional of the year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 68% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 63% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.7%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 70.3%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.2%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.8; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.2%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.3% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.7% of revenue deployed · 70.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $287K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $79K · 23 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 17/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.