Prestige Learning Institute

Legal name: Prestige Institute Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
823224098
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Official website data refreshed
Jul 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Houston, TX, US
Phone
713-969-8906
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Adult, Continuing Education

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,205,265
Expenses
$1,127,027
Assets
$543,906
Liabilities
$16,890

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SHARON OGDEN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL OBRINGER (EXECUTIVE DI): $19,531 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to glorify God by educating, equipping, & ministering to immigrant and refugee families, empowering them to thrive in the U.S.

What it reported doing in 2024

Adult programs - pli supports both women and men to thrive in the u.s. 270 clients participated in the men's and women's esl classes during the academic year, of which 86% advanced to a higher level. Additionally, 22 women completed an introductory digital literacy course, and 35 women completed a citizenship course. In total, the esl program served 285 individuals. Volunteers invested in relationship building with 37 women in their homes and built relationships with 76 immigrant and refugee men through weekly community nights and special events. 31% of men returned after their first visit. In total 572 clients participated in on-going programs; 614 clients attended a community event. Combined unduplicated number served was 987.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 88% 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 82.3%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.91 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 25th 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.5%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.48; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.7%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 30.8% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 23.8% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.2% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 77% of revenue deployed · 82.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $927K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $20K · 9 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $240K reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 30/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.