Teaching and Learning Collaborative Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
814967566
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2021
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
6199879069
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$254,541
Expenses
$249,269
Assets
$85,305
Liabilities
$3,536

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Bailey Choi-Vanos (President)
  • Mimi Tran (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Bailey Choi-Vanos (President): $22,500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Teaching and Learning Collaborative is a 501c3 non-profit organization consisting of educators and community members committed to supporting the growth and development of innovative teachers and groundbreaking schools.

What it reported doing in 2025

In FY25/26, the Teaching and Learning Collaborative continued to focus on supporting education in underserved communities. TLC partnered with San Diego Unified School District through QUEST to provide support in seven schools with high percentages of military-connected students. With funding from DoDEA (Department of Defense Education Activity), TLC facilitated professional development for the teachers and also trained and placed tutors at the partner schools. TLC hosted the second cohort of TLC Scholars (funded by the Lucky Duck Foundation), a program to bolster unaccompanied and housing-insecure high school students with academic support to ensure graduation, one-on-one help with developing a resume and finding a job, and community service opportunities to connect them to organizations and resources. In the summer program TLC worked with P-12 refugee youth on a variety of arts and science activities which included creating a garden, learning to cook, and doing an art installation at the site. We hosted free community gardening and cooking classes, free family art classes, and free book club meetings in which local teachers and researchers met to discuss inclusion, ways to foster robust friendship networks in the classroom, and other educational research programs. In total we provided a high quality, innovative educational experiences to over 200 refugee youth and several hundred community members.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61.5%; rating input score 61
  • Program expense ratio: 62.8%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3,434.22 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 2.1%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.34; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 41.9% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.7% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61.5% of revenue deployed · 62.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 9 board members independent · 0 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $156K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $22K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: 7 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.