Oley Valley Community Education Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
232867151
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Oley, PA, USA
Phone
6109874100
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$403,902
Expenses
$228,464
Assets
$1,229,978
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THOMAS KAUFFMAN (PRESIDENT (THROUGH 10/9/25))
  • KIRSTEN DEYSHER (VICE PRESIDENT (THROUGH 10/10/24))
  • STEPHANIE WAITS (TRUSTEE/PRESIDENT (EFFECTIVE 10/10/24))
  • LAUREN GLUCKMAN (TRUSTEE/VICE PRESIDENT (EFFECTIVE 10/9/25))
  • JENNIFER SCHORR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JENNIFER SCHORR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $43,203 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of the oley valley community education foundation is to enhance educational opportunities for the students, residents, employees, and alumni of the oley valley school district while encouraging community support and participation.

What it reported doing in 2024

Education project expenses: the organization funded $112,677 of grants to the oley valley school district to fund faculty-devised programs and projects that benefit students at the oley valley high school, middle school, and elementary school. Examples of these projects include biomedical learning experiences, video club, teachers in the parks, video club expansion, mobile agriculture laboratory, stem learning with hydroponics, and a career academy for workforce skills.

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 84% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. 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: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 48.1%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 80%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $19.29 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 97%; rating input score 97; 57th 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 43.4%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.38; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.9%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.4% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 48.1% of revenue deployed · 80% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $183K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $43K · 26 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 57/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.