Schools That Can Milwaukee Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 272818891
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2017
- Forms available
- Form 990 2017
- Location
- Milwaukee, WI, USA
- Phone
- 4149885359
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Public Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,919,620
- Expenses
- $2,150,035
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
26 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ABBY ANDRIETSCH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- ABBY ANDRIETSCH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $180,878 total reported compensation
- RASHIDA EVANS (CHIEF PROGRAM OFFICER): $154,450 total reported compensation
- STEPHANIE MANEY (DIRECTOR OF LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT): $140,378 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To ensure every single child in milwaukee has the opportunity to attend a high-quality school. We engage, empower, and connect transformational school leaders to foster more high-quality schools for the kids and families who need them most.
What it reported doing in 2017
Schools that can milwaukee, inc. (stcm) leads an unprecedented cross-sector collaboration of talented leaders from traditional district, independent charter, and private voucher schools serving predominantly low-income students. Our mission is to ensure every single child in milwaukee has the opportunity to attend a high-quality school. We engage, empower, and connect transformational school leaders to foster more high-quality schools for the kids and families who need them most, increasing opportunity and closing the achievement gap. Additional information can be found at the organization's website (www.stcmilwaukee.org).
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 73% for direct work, and 27% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The required major-donor schedule is missing or incomplete and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 83
- Transparency & Controls: 74
- Accountability: 98
- Sustainability: 6
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 90.9%; rating input score 91
- Program expense ratio: 80.9%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: $12.33 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 96.8%; rating input score 97; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 95.7%; rating input score 96; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -12%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 27.7%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 90.9% of revenue deployed · 80.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 22 of 23 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $181K · 26 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2011 to 2017
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 4 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 — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 48/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.