Power of Zero Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
873130936
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Jupiter, FL, USA
Phone
4155480929
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$251,932
Expenses
$217,584
Assets
$131,648
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Nicholas Carlisle (President and CEO)

People named in this filing

  • Philip Jonckheer (Chair)
  • Eva Bishop (Treasurer)
  • Sabrina Riveiro (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. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To prevent bullying and promote the social, emotional, and digital well-being of children in their first years of school, ensuring they have the values and skills needed to thrive in a connected world.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025, the Power of Zero Foundation dedicated its primary resources to the implementation of the No Bully program across US schools. This evidence-based initiative provides comprehensive training and strategic coaching to educators, enabling them to identify, address, and prevent bullying and cyberbullying. By fostering inclusive school cultures and equipping staff with specific intervention scripts and restorative practices, the program successfully helps schools reduce systemic harassment and strengthen students' social-emotional well-being. During this period, the Foundation provided professional development workshops and ongoing consultation to ensure sustainable, school-wide adoption of these protective measures.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 46.7%; rating input score 47
  • Program expense ratio: 54.2%; rating input score 54
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.89 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.6%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.61; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 19.2% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 37.3% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 46.7% of revenue deployed · 54.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $118K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and related organizations
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 47/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 28/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.