Oklahoma Partnership for School Readiness Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
300213815
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oklahoma City, OK, USA
Phone
4054294219
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$16,983,038
Expenses
$16,267,340
Assets
$6,359,536
Liabilities
$3,773,655

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AMY EMERSON (PRESIDENT)
  • AJ GRIFFIN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CARRIE WILLIAMS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CARRIE WILLIAMS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $184,871 total reported compensation
  • DAPHNE PESCHL (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE): $149,031 total reported compensation
  • STEPHANIE LIPPERT (DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS): $141,546 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 improve school readiness outcomes in Oklahoma.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community mobilization and support: opsrf supports community mobilization by engaging community leaders to develop stronger local early childhood systems. In april 2025, opsrf hosted its fourth annual ink day (invest n kids), bringing together over 200 early childhood professionals and pediatric residents for advocacy training and legislative visits at the Oklahoma state capitol. Participants shared with legislators that early childhood care and education is an economic issue as a tool to create jobs, support parents' self-sufficiency, and improve outcomes for Oklahoma's children.the Oklahoma clearinghouse for early childhood success: the clearinghouse promotes well-being for Oklahoma's children and their families by building an evolving definition of quality, fast-tracking innovation, implementing research-informed practices and practice-informed research to support and improve early childhood systems and maximize public-private partnerships. In fy25, submission rounds 7 and 8 were held.submissions are reviewed, and those highly rated by committee members are posted to the clearinghouse website and presented to the public-private partnership committee for consideration of implementation support. Opsrf seeks submissions through community mobilization and implementation within local communities. For round 7's infant and early childhood mental health, four submissions were added to the clearinghouse and three funded with federal preschool development grant dollars and matched with private dollars: little otter health, improving access to reflective consultation, and iecmh endorsedment for early childhood educators, and strengthening Oklahoma's iemch workforce. Round 8 had a total of nine proposals submitted; of these, two were approved for publication on the website. As of june 2025, one has been implemented rooted together: a cultural guide for families.Oklahoma's preschool development grant (pdg) birth through five renewal aims to build infrastructure, including early childhood data systems; enhance families' knowledge about the ecce mixed delivery system and support their access to programs and resources; expand access to high-quality ecce programs; support a qualified, well-compensated, and trained ecce workforce; evaluate effectiveness of grant activities; and disseminate information and best practices to enhance awareness and participation in b-5 system improvements. These outcomes will be achieved by scaling, spreading, and enhancing research-based and promising programs while also investing in innovative pilots and initiatives.pdg made investments in family engagement in communities through reach out & read, the Oklahoma commission on children and youth, and home visitation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 96% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 47% for direct work, and 53% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 95
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.9%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 96.9%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: $563.8 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 4.2%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.39; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.59; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.7%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 23.2% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 22.4% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.1% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.9% of revenue deployed · 96.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $15.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $185K · 13 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 28 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 24 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.