The Partner Alliance for Safer Schools

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
850960120
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Cedar Rapids, IA, USA
Phone
3193666722
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$232,727
Expenses
$116,652
Assets
$441,332
Liabilities
$67,110

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • WILSON CHUCK R (CHAIR): $27,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide school administrators and personnel, school boards and public safety and security professionals with information, tools and insight needed to implement a layered and tiered approach to securing and enhancing the safety of school envirnoments based on local needs, nationwide best practices, and effective utilization of available resources.

What it reported doing in 2024

Pass' activities are primarily educational in purpose, supporting objectives that align with its vision and mission, including implementation of related policies. Pass will focus on education, training, industry awareness, and the development of recommended practices, guidelines and assessment tools that enable the design and implementation of technical solutions within a layered and tiered approach to an all-hazards school safety environment. Pass has trained about 1,000 people in person and over 3,000 via webinars.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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 - 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: 37
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 29.8%; rating input score 30
  • Program expense ratio: 59.5%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 49.9%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.78; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.1%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 53.6% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 19.2% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 53.8% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 29.8% of revenue deployed · 59.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $69K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $27K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 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 30/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.