Isd 88 Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
455615797
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2013
Location
New Ulm, MN, USA
Phone
5072338313
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$98,198
Expenses
$60,806
Assets
$698,832
Liabilities
$3,728

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ABBY SWENSON (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • STEPHANIE KIRCHER (EXECUTIVE DI): $20,148 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 enhance the quality of education in isd 88 while creating partnerships between our schools, our communities and alumni.

What it reported doing in 2025

During 2025, the isd 88 foundation continued to expand on their granting process to give funds to the new ulm public schools for educational enhancements. The foundation was able to fund four projects in 2025. The first was middle school microscopes. This grant upgraded microscopes to ensure a smooth transition to high school science, giving each student hands-on access during class. The next grant was for glockenspiels for jefferson elementary. This grant introduced instruments for grades 1-4 to build foundational music skills through hands-on learning. The third grant was for middle school circut machines. This provided tolls to support student creativity, entrepreneurship, and real- wrold design skills. The last grant was for innovative seating in mrs. Brooks class. This added flexible seating options like kickstand desks and medicine balls to hlep active learners stay focused and engaged.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 73% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 44
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 44.9%; rating input score 45
  • Program expense ratio: 45.7%; rating input score 46
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.77 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 32; 32nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: 38.1%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.49; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 33.1%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -17.6% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -15.6% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 44.9% of revenue deployed · 45.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $28K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $20K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 32/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.