Kipp Dc Supporting Corp

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
471876264
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2022655477
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,384,504
Expenses
$218,431
Assets
$20,608,024
Liabilities
$34,116

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID ENDOM (CHAIR AND VICE PRESIDENT)
  • SHANNON HODGE (PRESIDENT, KIPP DC PCS (PRESIDENT))

Highest reported compensation

  • SHANNON HODGE (PRESIDENT, KIPP DC PCS (PRESIDENT)): $312,274 total reported compensation
  • JUSTIN ELLIS (TREASURER/CFO-KIPP DC PCS): $278,701 total reported compensation
  • SARAH JANE FORMAN (SECRETARY, GEN. COUNSEL): $240,051 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The kipp dc sc is organized and shall be operated exclusively for educational and/or charitable purposes within the meaning of sections 501(c)(3) and 170(c)(2) of the internal revenue code of 1986 or the corresponding provisions of any future united states internal revenue law (the g code h). Specifically, the objects and purposes to be transacted, promoted, and carried on by the corporation are as follows:(1) raising funds to provide funds for the benefit of, and to support all aspects of the mission of, to kipp dc pcs (2) acquiring, holding and managing assets for use by to kipp dc pcs where doing so may result in lower costs or greater efficiencies for to kipp dc pcs and(3) pursuing any other purposes which a nonprofit corporation organized under the act and described in section 501(c)(3) of the code is legally entitled to pursue, provided that such purposes must further the purpose set forth in sub-articles (1) and (2) above.

What it reported doing in 2024

Kipp dc sc will provide support to kipp dc public charter school's teacher retention initiative to retain kipp dc lead teachers at kipp dc public charter schools

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 87% 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 33
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 5.9%; rating input score 6
  • Program expense ratio: 88.6%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 96.6%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 94.35; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 35.7%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 5.9% of revenue deployed · 88.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $194K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $312K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 6/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.