North Clackamas Education Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
931114786
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2010
Location
Milwaukie, OR, USA
Phone
503.353.6053
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$681,312
Expenses
$470,141
Assets
$895,926
Liabilities
$179,523

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Lois Costine (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Stephanie Rose (Executive Dir.): $72,973 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 support the North Clackamas School District through teacher grants, scholarships, gifts to after-school and pre-K programs, and services for food-insecure students.

What it reported doing in 2024

The North Clackamas School District serves more than 17,000 students in its 32 schools, from a variety of economic and social backgrounds. The North Clackamas Education Foundation strives to bring equitable educational offerings to the entire district. We do that through fundraising and working with concerned private and public community partners. Funds were provided to the family support center. The family support center provides essential support such as food, clothing, hygiene items, and school supplies to students and their families. The family support center also oversees an emergency housing program that supplies families in the North Clackamas School District with one-time Rent or Utility Assistance.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 95% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.5%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 75.5%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $38.69 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 59.3%; rating input score 59; 30th 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 31%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.91; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.5%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 8 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 53.5% of revenue deployed · 75.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $355K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $73K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 25 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.