MAPSA Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
383275525
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lansing, MI, USA
Phone
5173749167
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,011,938
Expenses
$2,052,758
Assets
$1,626,789
Liabilities
$797,603

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Daniel Quisenberry (President/Executive DirectorPresident/Executive Director)
  • Alicia Urbain (Vice President of Legal and Governmental Affairs)

Highest reported compensation

  • Daniel Quisenberry (President/Executive DirectorPresident/Executive Director): $237,266 total reported compensation
  • Alicia Urbain (Vice President of Legal and Governmental Affairs): $180,612 total reported compensation
  • Heather Risner (Membership and development): $146,663 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide leadership to advance quality and promote choice in education through chartered public schools and their supporters, offering every Michigan child an opportunity

What it reported doing in 2024

Stakeholder engagement - This program work is rooted in the development of stakeholder relationships, inclusive of educators, parents, and other strategic partners to further the impact of an environment supportive of school choice. More specifically, the program seeks to connect individuals, convene groups, and facilitate initiatives to foster creative problem solving and innovation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.7%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 83.5%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $32.37 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings

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: Limited
  • 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.49; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 34%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -19.7% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -16.4% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.5% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.7% of revenue deployed · 83.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $237K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.