The Endowment Project Education Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
924023942
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Richmond, VA, USA
Phone
8045009862
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,029,670
Expenses
$543,154
Assets
$706,615
Liabilities
$33,030

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANNY STERLING (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • RACHEL BIUNDO (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • LEIGH ANN BOLAND (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LEIGH ANN BOLAND (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $72,483 total reported compensation
  • RACHEL BIUNDO (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $55,733 total reported compensation
  • DANNY STERLING (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $2,540 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The endowment project educaton foundation is closing the funding gap between public and private education in america by building a culture of direct, focused, and impactful philanthropy designed to support school-level and systemic public education needs.

What it reported doing in 2024

In 2024, the endowment project foundation raised funds for over 100 public high schools across Virginia. The foundation secures funding for public high school support and awards those funds in accordance with donor instructions and demonstrated school needs. Working in partnership with alumni and community supporters, tepf secured nearly $750k in contributed income, including nearly $450k specifically designated to support school needs. In 2024, tepf awarded over $200k directly to support school projects, including the renovation of a concessions stand, revitalization of a theater program, college scholarships for first-generation students, teacher professional development funding, and teacher and staff appreciation awards. Tepf also launched the first-of-its-kind alumni-funded title-1 unrestricted endowment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 41% for direct work, and 59% for 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: 46
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 35%; rating input score 35
  • Program expense ratio: 66%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.97 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 88.6%; rating input score 89; 37th 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 47.2%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.3; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.1%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 141.9% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 96% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 102.6% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 35% of revenue deployed · 66% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $358K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $72K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 8 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 35/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 41/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.