PS Science

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200607113
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Inglewood, CA, USA
Phone
4242274606
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,021,248
Expenses
$944,788
Assets
$826,712
Liabilities
$273,569

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Julie Olds (Executive Dir.): $103,700 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 great minds of tomorrow are in elementary schools everywhere, but science isnot. PS Science brings to elementary classrooms and program sites inspiring lessons that cultivate a deep understanding of the world and grow students and teachers who are confident and inspired by science.

What it reported doing in 2024

Enrichment programs: in the 2024-25 year ps science continued to increase the number and diversity of out-of-school time enrichment stem programs provided. All ps science enrichment programs are provided at no cost to students at schools, community centers, libraries, and parks.we also provided family science nights programs at several schools, and participated in community stem events around los angeles county.through a grant from the ppg foundation, we were able to run year-long stem programs at three rec and park centers in the sylmar area, and at several la city libraries. Ps science received funding through great public schools now to provide summer enrichment stem classes to students at 8 lausd schools. Ps science also provided weekly summer stem programs for kids at inglewood parks summer camp, la city rec & park camps, the girls club la, 4 freedom school sites, the al wooten jr. Youth center, and several charter schools.finally, three sessions of the ps science s-team rangers camp were run in june and july 2024. Two sessions were held in-person at crossroads school in santa monica for 50 4th and 5th grade students. The two week s-team rangers camp allowed students to immerse themselves in rich stem learning experiences and form friendships with students from other schools. The third camp session was held at f.d. Roosevelt elementary school in lawndale for 25 3rd 4th grade students from lawndale ps science partner schools and provided the same rich social and learning community for stem-loving students.

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

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.5%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 75.7%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.41 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.5%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.88; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.5% of revenue deployed · 75.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $715K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $104K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 24/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.