Rutherford County Schools Education Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272771407
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Forest City, NC, USA
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$403,537
Expenses
$341,638
Assets
$921,868
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Ritchie Garland (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Ritchie Garland (Executive Director)
  • Dr Janet Mason (Chairman)
  • Jackie Hampton (Vice-Chairman)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To develop and administer programs to promote, support, and enhance the rutherford county board of education, the rutherford county schools and the students attending those schools.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community action program camp innovate: a dynamic sumemr experience designed to spark creativity and curiosity through hands on stem and design challenges project steam: initiative to engage students in real-world science explorations that blend creativity engineering and technology ai in action: providing technology across our district and developing applied ai practices and expanding our program offerings that prepare them for the future of innovation

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 83% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 88.5%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.82 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 58.9%; rating input score 59; 44th 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 15.3%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.7; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.9% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75% of revenue deployed · 88.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $302K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 21 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 46/100.
  • 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.