San Francisco Coalition of Essential Small Schools

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
562544544
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Oakland, CA, USA
Phone
4154830933
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$898,707
Expenses
$882,924
Assets
$555,765
Liabilities
$319,499

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Dr Gregory Peters (Executive Dir.): $157,617 total reported compensation
  • Michele Godwin (Dir. Ops): $79,178 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our organizations primary exempt purpose is to advance educational equity by supporting small, innovative public schools and the educators who serve them. We provide professional development, student leadership opportunities, community partnerships, and collaborative events that strengthen school communities and promote student success.

What it reported doing in 2023

Coaching and FacilitationSF-CESS provides coaching and training for partnered school leaders and organizations addressing the pattern of inequity for students within the present education system with a goal of interrupting and changing these patterns. This includes holding professional development trainings, hosting webinars, and direct services to individuals or teams through presenting our curriculum and practices.Summer Sessions (iGroups)SF-CESS holds week long institutes that are open for anyone to attend. During thisweek-long institute, participants are taken on an in-depth and hands-on course of our self-developed equity-based curriculum. The goal of the institute is for participants to be able to take and apply the methodologies and learning to their own circumstances.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 97% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

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: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.7%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 81.6%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.8%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.63; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.57; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.8%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.7% of revenue deployed · 81.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $720K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $158K · 9 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.