Izzi Early Education
Legal name: Institute for Human & Social Development
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 942920286
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- San Bruno, CA, US
- Phone
- (650) 578-3440
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Kindergarten, Preschool, Nursery School, Early Admissions
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $22,075,010
- Expenses
- $22,211,785
- Assets
- $13,550,129
- Liabilities
- $7,830,605
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Angel Barrios (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Angel Barrios (Executive Director): $221,798 total reported compensation
- Madelene Gallego (Chief Financial Officer): $213,390 total reported compensation
- Anne Carzon (Human Resources Director): $172,061 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 ensure children ages 0–5 have access to high-quality early learning, partnering with San Mateo County’s families with the highest needs.
What it reported doing in 2024
Head Start/Early Head Start: provides low-income families with high quality child development and comprehensive services in the County of San Mateo. Child Care Food Program: provides food services to eligible children enrolled in the Head Start program. State Preschool: Conduct state preschool program for children ages three to five year old.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 82
- Transparency & Controls: 60
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 29
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 93%; rating input score 93
- Program expense ratio: 92.4%; rating input score 92
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: -0.6%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.61; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.58; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.1%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 17.3% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 93% of revenue deployed · 92.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $20.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $222K · 15 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.4M reported
- Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.