International School of Greenville

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
881162240
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Simpsonville, SC, USA
Phone
8645164434
Rating
45
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Primary, Elementary Schools

Reported finances

Revenue
$480,446
Expenses
$400,337
Assets
$118,920
Liabilities
$16,589

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

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Florance Laforge (President)

People named in this filing

  • Florance Laforge (President)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the organization is to further bilingual Pre-K through 12g education.

What it reported doing in 2024

The described activity is focused on providing PreK-12 education at St Giles Presbyterian Church located in Greenville South Carolina. This educational service making up 94 percent of the organizations activities is offered five days a week by certified teachers whose qualifications are accredited by educational authorities like the French Department of Education or the South Carolina Department of Education. The organization rents classroom spaces in the church for a monthly fee of 100 per student under a lease agreement that includes all occupancy costs utilities maintenance insurance taxes security covered by the church. Additionally the organization pays for dedicated internet services and optional deep cleaning of school areas. Funding for this educational service comes from tuition fees paid by parents and public donations. Scholarships are also available offering reduced tuition based on families financial capabilities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 16.7%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -200% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 31.7% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 116.3% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $400K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 39 current checks pass · 9 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesLegal column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX InformationTechnology column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Insurance column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Occupancy column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherSalariesAndWages column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PayrollTaxes column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Travel column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.