Stem Education Coalition Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472094530
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2024002192
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$213,233
Expenses
$213,233
Assets
$54,158
Liabilities
$15,159

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES F BROWN III (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • THOMAS PHILLIPS (DIRECTOR)
  • ANITA KRISHNAMURTHI (DIRECTOR)
  • ZACH IZAKOWITZ (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

The mission of the stem education coalition is to elevate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education as a public policy priority at the federal and state level through legislation, budget, and spending priorities, and education policies.

What it reported doing in 2024

Stem education coalition, joined by 31 member organizations, sent a letter to the white house office of science and technology policy (ostp) to provide suggestions as the office developed the 2023-2028 federal stem strategic plan. The comments centered on the key challenges in k-12 stem education (equity, teaching and learning, partnerships, systemic reform, and the role of federal agencies) that should be addressed, and provided six overall recommendations for ostp to consider.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.7%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 97%; 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: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • 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: 0%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96.7% of revenue deployed · 97% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $207K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $204K reported
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.