Public Education Foundation of Marion County Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
592949915
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Ocala, FL, USA
Phone
3526714167
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,245,045
Expenses
$2,134,102
Assets
$4,233,757
Liabilities
$62,367

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MEL POOLE (PRESIDENT)
  • MEGHAN MAGAMOLL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR DIANE GULLETT (BOARD MEMBER): $305,606 total reported compensation
  • GINGER CRUZE (BOARD MEMBER): $145,666 total reported compensation
  • KEVIN CHRISTIAN (BOARD MEMBER): $144,492 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To financially and materially support marion county public schools, its students and teachers. This is done by focusing community interest on public education; initiating support and underwriting projects and programs that benefit students, teachers, administrators, and marion county public schools.

What it reported doing in 2024

See schedule ogrants for great ideas is a competitive grant program open to all marion county public schools teachers and principals. The grants provide financial resources to implement creative and innovative curriculum and programs in the areas of stem education, literacy, assisting low-performing students, increasing graduation rates, career and technical education, teacher quality, and supporting students in need, including mental health and wellness initiatives. The grant applications are scored by a group of community volunteers and foundation board members. Grants are scored on the following criteria: 1. Addresses a need or creates an opportunity. 2. Will positively impact student learning. 3. Measurable outcomes are realistic. 4. Follow-up evaluation. 5. Number of low performing and overall students impacted. During the 2024-25 school year, approximately $115,572 in grants for great ideas projects was awarded.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 61% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.8%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 78.1%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $26.74 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 2nd 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: 93.2%; rating input score 93; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.9%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.98; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.4%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 74.8% of revenue deployed · 78.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $306K · 24 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 35 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 34 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 34 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.