Perris Elementary Teachers Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330611939
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2019
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Perris, CA, USA
Phone
9516573118
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$85,336
Expenses
$56,410
Assets
$233,544
Liabilities
$25,919

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SARAH ROWBOTHAM 10 MONTHS (President)
  • CRAIG HADESTY (PRESIDENT/VP)

People named in this filing

  • SARAH ROWBOTHAM 10 MONTHS (President)
  • CRAIG HADESTY (PRESIDENT/VP)
  • MICHAEL CAPPS (Treasurer/VP)

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 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of peta is to represent its members with their employers, and to be the exclusive representative of appropriate bargaining units of school employees of the perris elementary unified school district in all matters related to employment conditions and relations.

What it reported doing in 2019

Promoted advancement of education, to further the educational interests of the member associations & to furnish a practical basis for the united action devoted to the cause of education within the public school districts employing teachers by the member associations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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

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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 72
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.6%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 81%; rating input score 81

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 33.9%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.14; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.1% per year; rating input score 0; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.6% of revenue deployed · 81% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $46K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2011 to 2019
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

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

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.