Spitler School Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
208085411
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2021
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
6028629438
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$265,280
Expenses
$282,363
Assets
$260,377
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANIEL I SPITLER (President)
  • LINDSEY S OAKES (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • DANIEL I SPITLER (President)
  • PAMELA P SPITLER (Secretary)
  • DEWEY DEE SPITLER (Director)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To improve the educational opportunities of underprivileged children.

What it reported doing in 2024

The spitler school foundation supports educational opportunities for approximately 1500 children in cambodia. There are currently over 600 students in spitler school and 200 students at kurata primary school, approximately 400 students at stephen mazujian middle school, and approximately 200 students at norkor community high school. While the majoryity of funds are directed to the spitler primary school, the spitler school foundation secures and distributes funding for educational programs at all four schools.the primary funding is to provide salaries and teaching supplies for programs that teach english and it skills, however, the foundation also provides funding for, building maintenance, new construction, clean drinking water, general school supplies, sports teams and scholarships.spitler school foundation also partners an organization called kids play international which teaches gender equality, as well as other qualities using sports programs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% 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

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 53
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97.5%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6.4%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.92; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 4 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $275K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 15 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.