No Racism in Schools

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
883917730
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2022–2022
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Las Vegas, NV, USA
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Intergroup, Race Relations

Reported finances

Revenue
$197,855
Expenses
$112,523
Assets
$179,826
Liabilities
$94,494

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JShauntae Marshall (President)

People named in this filing

  • JShauntae Marshall (President)
  • Akiko Cooks (Director)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

At No Racism In Schools #1865 our mission is clear: to create a society where educational environments are free from hate prejudice and discrimination. We are dedicated to closing the gaps in policies laws and protocols that perpetuate racism within our schools. By targeting these systemic issues we aim to foster a culture of inclusivity and tolerance with a steadfast commitment to zero tolerance for racism. Our goal is to provide every child with a safe and equitable learning experience irrespective of their race or background.

What it reported doing in 2022

A Special Education Teach-In and Town Hall was held for students and families on November 4 2022 at 910 W. Owens Ave. Las Vegas NV 89106. The event aimed to educate attendees on various topics including Terms and definitions Eligibility IEP vs. 504 Plans Knowing your rights Components of an IEP Accommodations Modifications Parental Advocacy Important contacts and Q&A. The event featured two sign language interpreters offered the presentation in Spanish and provided translation services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 43.1%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.6; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.53; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.7%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 8 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.