Syracuse City School District Educational Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
020651844
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2009, Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Syracuse, NY, USA
Phone
3153910259
Rating
41
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$41,065
Expenses
$69,641
Assets
$17,602
Liabilities
$12,491

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

People named in this filing

  • CONWAY RICH (BOARD MEMBER)
  • PEREZ DIANA (BOARD MEMBER)
  • BLACK KENYON (BOARD MEMBER)

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

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The syracuse city school district educational foundation provides financial support for syracuse city school district (the district) special projects, events, and activities that the district has been unable to fund because they fall outside the scope of the normal budget.

What it reported doing in 2025

Expenses for financial support for syracuse city school district special projects, events, and activities that the district has been unable to fund because they fall outside the scope of the normal budget.grants and scholarships awarded are based on individual applications and are disbursed to schools within the district based on assessed needs which fall outside of the scope of the district's budget.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -69.6%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.71; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -26.3% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.6% per year; rating input score 0; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.7% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.