KIPP Philadelphia Schools

Legal name: Kipp Administrative Services Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
452384209
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Philadelphia, PA, US
Phone
(215) 294.8596
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$13,210,160
Expenses
$12,891,919
Assets
$7,994,402
Liabilities
$2,231,504

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NATALIE WILTSHIRE (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • NATALIE WILTSHIRE (CEO): $314,973 total reported compensation
  • LIBING LI (CFO): $242,821 total reported compensation
  • ROBERT VIEIRA (COO): $218,928 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Together with families and communities, we create joyful, academically excellent schools that prepare students with the skills and confidence they need to pursue the paths they choose—college, career, and beyond—so they can lead fulfilling lives and build a more just world.

What it reported doing in 2024

Providing business, facility, administrative and development support to the kipp schools in the philadelphia area and the awarding of scholarships and grants, including educational improvement grants as defined under Pennsylvania law to public elementary and secondary schools in Pennsylvania. We service philadelphia's most educationally underserved communities and provided the critical resources needed to support the social-emotional health of our students, families, alumni, and staff.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 85% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 53% for direct work, and 47% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.5%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 68.9%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.91 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • 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: 2.4%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.62; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.9%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.6% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 66.5% of revenue deployed · 68.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $8.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $315K · 13 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $395K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.