PowerMyLearning Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133935309
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2125637300
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Computer Science

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,876,922
Expenses
$7,384,489
Assets
$2,719,803
Liabilities
$739,257

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Dr Arun Ramanathan (Chief Executive Officer)

Highest reported compensation

  • KARUPPIAH GANESAN (MANAGING DIRECTOR, TECH. & ARC): $252,663 total reported compensation
  • Jill Nyhus (Chief Growth Officer): $246,051 total reported compensation
  • SEAN KIM (Chief Administrative Officer): $222,070 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We design evidence-based programs, innovative tools, and professional learning that reveal how students think about mathematics, giving educators deeper insights that save time and improve instruction. For more than 25 years, PowerMyLearning has partnered with schools and districts across the country to strengthen math learning, particularly for multilingual learners and students from historically underserved communities. Our programs are backed by a robust evidence base, including statistically significant impact on math achievement for K-5 students.

What it reported doing in 2024

PowerMyLearning works hand-in-hand with educators to foster equitable learning environments that empower each student to thrive academically, socially, and emotionally. Over the past year, we provided professional learning and coaching to K-12 teachers and school leaders across multiple schools and districts, helping them strengthen their instructional practices in math. Our programs have led to improvements in student learning and teacher practices. We continue to prioritize working in historically marginalized communities, ensuring that educators and students receive the support they need to succeed. Additionally, we are expanding efforts to support schools and districts in implementing high-quality instructional materials (HQIM) in math to improve student outcomes, particularly for underserved districts, schools and students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 70% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.7%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 70.3%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.6 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -25.7%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.37; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.2%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.7% of revenue deployed · 70.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $253K · 26 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $738K reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.