St Helena Public Schools Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942891817
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
St Helena, CA, USA
Phone
7079634282
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$175,710
Expenses
$74,800
Assets
$529,787
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Lisa Goldfarb (President)
  • Coco Lopez (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Lisa Goldfarb (President)
  • Dani Brown (Treasurer)
  • Coco Lopez (Vice President)

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 ensure that St. Helena, California public schools have the financial means to provide engaging, high quality educational experiences for all students. The Organization seeks to augment existing programs and activities by providing grant funding for innovative and engaging learning projects and experiences that the St. Helena school district would otherwise not be able to provide.

What it reported doing in 2024

Grant funding provided to elementary, middle and high schools in the city of St. Helena, CA to support innovative and engaging learning projects and experiences in the fields of sports, music, and language arts. Grants provided during the fiscal year included funding for band programs, sports equipment, library additions, clubs and special events.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 90% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 42
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 30%; rating input score 30
  • Program expense ratio: 60.3%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.06 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 80.8%; rating input score 81; 48th 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 57.4%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.08; rating input score 85; 85th 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: -4.9% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 30% of revenue deployed · 60.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $45K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 30/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 48/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.