Matriots Education Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
844508818
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Columbus, OH, USA
Phone
2026749854
Rating
53
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$364,728
Expenses
$215,064
Assets
$281,988
Liabilities
$26,501

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • EMILY M SCHRIVER (EXECUTIVE DI): $171,135 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 connect, educate and empower ohioans, regardless of political affiliation, to engage more fully in the nonpartisan electoral system.

What it reported doing in 2025

The mission of the matriots education fund is to demystify the political arena, its systems, processes and roles, so that people understand - and leverage - the power of their participation. Our programs include events, sessions, and projects like: 1.presenting educational programs on why representative government should reflect all ohioans, barriers to entry into electoral processes, and the impact people can have in local and state policy. 2.funding, conducting, and publishing research. This research may focus on demographic shifts in political office, lack of representation in the electoral system, and/or barriers that lead to under-representation of particular demographic groups. 3.collaborating with mission-aligned organizations to present the importance of advocating for all voices in the political arena. 4.conducting presentations that discuss differing viewpoints, values-based governing, overcoming the challenges of a campaign, the available roles someone can run for, the impact people can have in their community, and why representative government is important.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

MIXED - 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: 29
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 23.3%; rating input score 23
  • Program expense ratio: 39.5%; rating input score 39
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 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: 41%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.31; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 38.1%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 63.2% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 55.7% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 23.3% of revenue deployed · 39.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $85K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $171K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 23/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.