San Francisco Forty Niners Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 770287514
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Santa Clara, CA, USA
- Phone
- 4085624949
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Family Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $7,833,698
- Expenses
- $7,771,864
- Assets
- $12,709,689
- Liabilities
- $3,144,175
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
24 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOHN C YORK (PRESIDENT)
- JUSTIN PRETTYMAN (VP, PHILANTHROPY & EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- JUSTIN PRETTYMAN (VP, PHILANTHROPY & EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $263,223 total reported compensation
- AUSTIN FLEISHOUR (SENIOR DIRECTOR, PHILANTHROPY & STRATEGIC PARTNERS): $237,289 total reported compensation
- PEGGY BRADLEY (DIRECTOR, PHILANTHROPIC FINANCE & ACCOUNTING): $153,350 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
See schedule o
What it reported doing in 2024
49ers edu presented by chevron leverages the game of football and levi's stadium as platforms to expose students at an early age to steam (science, technology, engineering, art & math) concepts and careers, creating excitement and engagement around learning. By providing standard-aligned physical and digital enrichment materials to those furthest from resource and opportunity, 49ers edu can be a catalyst in creating interest and developing steam literacy. Committed to serving students, teachers, and families in the bay area, 49ers edu empowers our youth by building 21st century skills and foundational steam knowledge to better prepare them as future leaders of their communities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 74
- Transparency & Controls: 68
- Accountability: 81
- Sustainability: 48
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 79.5%; rating input score 80
- Program expense ratio: 78.2%; rating input score 78
- Fundraising efficiency: $7.34 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 52.5%; rating input score 52; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 95.2%; rating input score 95; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: 0.8%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.64; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 79.5% of revenue deployed · 78.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 20 of 21 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $6.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $263K · 24 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 24 of 26 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 18 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 24 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 28/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 52/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
- 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: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.