Tam District Alternative Schools Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
812155654
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Larkspur, CA, USA
Phone
4159453761
Rating
93
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Parent/Teacher Group

Reported finances

Revenue
$40,518
Expenses
$54,969
Assets
$60,784

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KIM STIFFLER (President)

People named in this filing

  • KIM STIFFLER (President)
  • Susanne Woods (Treasurer)
  • Beth Bailey-Gates (Secretary)

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 Tam District Alternative Schools Foundation raises funds to provide supplemental funding to the alternative school programs in the Tamalpais Union High School District to furnish educational and enrichment opportunities to students and provide support and professional development for staff.

What it reported doing in 2025

Provided scholarships and academic enrichment opportunities to students in the Pathways Program in the Tamalpais Union High School District. These scholarships supported students in taking classes at local community colleges during their year in the Pathways Program and awarded scholarships for college to graduating seniors.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 95% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 99
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 98.2%; rating input score 98

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: -35.7%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.11; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -13.1% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -14.2% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 98.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $54K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.