Greater Rochester Summer Learning Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
452797098
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Rochester, NY, USA
Phone
5854544945
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$610,502
Expenses
$712,201
Assets
$274,570
Liabilities
$7,351

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Tariq Smith (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Tariq Smith (Executive Director): $77,462 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 support the development and success of high quality summer learning programs for low-income children in the Rochester City School District (RCSD) and in the Greater Rochester area.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Greater Rochester Summer Learning Association (GRSLA) is a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit regional summer learning intermediary leveraging a highly developed and effective early childhood system to increase kindergarten readiness, bring equity during the summer to lower resourced families, and to create summer employment opportunities within the community childcare sector. The primary activity is providing effective, tuition-free, evidence-based, summer learning and enrichment. The ongoing summer effort is called "summerLEAP" where LEAP stands for Learning Enrichment to Achieve Potential. This program is supported by contributions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.1%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 80.6%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $21.18 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -16.7%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.39; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.9%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.1% of revenue deployed · 80.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $574K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $77K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.