ISchools

Legal name: Ischools Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472520523
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Boxborough, MA, USA
Phone
4126245140
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$473,028
Expenses
$371,346
Assets
$775,159
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • WJATSCHESLAW STERZER (EXEC DIR (FR): $89,279 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL SEADLE (EXEC DIR (TH): $15,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

One of the important characteristics of the iSchools is that all full members have doctoral programs, and recognize the importance of research and teaching about all forms of information and its implications for our society.

What it reported doing in 2024

The ischools collaborate on goals such as 1) leading, promoting and shaping the academic field of information, 2) creating effective responses to strategic research and to leverage funding to advance academic opportunities in the field of information, 3) enabling members to share solutions, 4) providing perspectives on matters of policy that affect the collection, organization, dissemination, preservation, and use of information, 5) providing resources about information integrity manipulation. The ischools host an international conference each year that covers topics important to the community. Those attending the conference need not be members of the ischools. The general public is welcome to attend.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 61% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 89% 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 - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 51.7%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 65.5%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • 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: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 21.5%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.09; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 28.1%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 51.7% of revenue deployed · 65.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $243K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $89K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes foreign activity and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.