South Pasadena Educational Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
953532316
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
South Pasadena, CA, USA
Phone
6264415810
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,954,564
Expenses
$2,635,382
Assets
$3,228,289
Liabilities
$629,401

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

Leadership & pay

33 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GRACE KUNG (PRESIDENT)
  • STACEY PETERSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • STACEY PETERSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $105,492 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Founded in 1980 by a group of passionate parents, south pasadena educational foundation (spef) is dedicated to promoting educational excellence in the south pasadena unified school district through various fundraising and enrichment programs. Administered by a volunteer board of directors composed of parents, community members and business leaders, spef provides much needed support to the students in south pasadena in all educational areas including academics, curriculum and technology, library services and support, visual and performing arts, science, character building education, counseling services, and athletics. Donations to spef support south pasadena's five public schools: arroyo vista elementary, marengo elementary, monterey hills elementary, south pasadena middle school, and south pasadena high school. Since its inception, spef has raised close to ten million dollars to restore and enrich educational programs beyond that which the school district is able to fund.

What it reported doing in 2024

The teacher direct grants allow teachers and support staff to apply for grants up to $4,500 to implement unique programs in their classrooms, helping them enhance the curriculum to meet the needs of all students, and to ignite curiosity. Teacher direct grants affect all curriculums such as science, with the "juice for juice" chemistry grant; engineering, with the "femineer program" which engages k-12 girls in stem; learning to code, with our ozobots grant, and literacy and music, with the "music touches everybody" library grant. Standing desks were purchased to improve learning opportunities in the classrooms for students with adhd, and kindergarten students' creativity were encouraged with the imagination playground grant.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 74% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 55% for direct work, and 45% for grants.
  • 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.6%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 87.8%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.89 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th 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; 72nd 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: 10.8%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.22; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.6% of revenue deployed · 87.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 32 of 32 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $105K · 33 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 17/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.