Spark Sf Public Schools

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
474568396
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2015
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4155300012
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$16,651,127
Expenses
$17,363,801
Assets
$21,836,191
Liabilities
$15,757,427

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Ginny Fang (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • MATT WAYNE (Director): $384,380 total reported compensation
  • Ginny Fang (President): $258,925 total reported compensation
  • KARLING AGUILERA-FORT (Director): $253,420 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Spark sf public schools' mission is to build private financial support and partnerships to supprot sfusd's mission and vision to ensure each and every child has access to the quality instruction and equitable supports they need to thrive in the 21st century. Spark focuses on key strategic priority fundraising areas including: learning, innovation, equity, access, wellness, and talent.

What it reported doing in 2024

Spark SF Public Schools mobilizes philanthropic and community investment in the San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) to ensure all San Franciscans have access to an excellent and equitable public education. Spark leverages philanthropic support to pilot new ventures, propel promising ideas, and scale proven practices across the district such as SFUSDs new literacy and math curricula through its Ready, Set, Read! and Path to Math campaigns; bolstering student attendance through its Every Day Counts campaign; expanding mental health services through its Middle School Mental Health initiative; advancing equity through its support for the African American Achievement and Leadership Initiative; as well as providing students with exposure to college and career opportunities such as the Mission Bay Hub.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 97% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 98
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.6%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 95.5%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: $297.63 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 81.2%; rating input score 81; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: -4.3%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.26; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.72; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.4%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.7% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.6% of revenue deployed · 95.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 16 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $16.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $384K · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $291K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.