Public Education Partners Greenville County
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 570769637
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Greenville, SC, USA
- Phone
- 8642334137
- Rating
- 87
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $781,387
- Expenses
- $886,388
- Assets
- $1,580,762
- Liabilities
- $129,126
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CATHERINE SCHUMACHER (PRESIDENT &)
Highest reported compensation
- CATHERINE SCHUMACHER (PRESIDENT &): $121,325 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Vision: a greenville county that shines as a model for how collective community engagement yields opportunity and success for all students in public education. Mission: public education partners greenville county was established in 1985 as a nonprofit organization created to lead the community in acting collectively to support, strengthen, and advance public education and student achievement in greenville county schools.
What it reported doing in 2024
Pep supports three levels for change: elevate teachers: pep invests in creating conditions that position greenville as an ideal destination for teachers by supporting teacher recruitment, retention, and morale. Work includes classroom grants, professional development trainings and fellowships, awareness-building campaigns, alternative certification pathways, and other supports. Empower advocates: pep embraces an advocacy point of view that supports our mission and builds a space for champions to learn, engage, and lift their voices in support of public education. This includes research, an annual policy agenda, and outreach to and engagement of key stakeholders and constituencies to learn and take action. Engage communities: pep supports work at a systems level by connecting people and ideas to improve educational outcomes and inform cross-sector issues, conversations, and action. This includes community learning opportunities, volunteer engagement, and pathways to directly support student learning through summer reading initiatives and other interventions.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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
STRONG - 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: 81
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 33
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 92.5%; rating input score 92
- Program expense ratio: 81.3%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: $6.59 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 25; 25th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: -13.4%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.78; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 13.7%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 92.5% of revenue deployed · 81.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $721K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $121K · 20 people listed
- Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 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 25/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.