The Peach Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
912155836
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Foster City, CA, USA
Phone
6505251188
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,988,494
Expenses
$1,154,489
Assets
$12,224,778
Liabilities
$4,344

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RUTH JENG (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • RUTH JENG (PRESIDENT): $50,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Granting scholarships and educational funds to help children from the poorest parts of china and southeast asia with an opportunity to complete a college education. To help break the vicious cycle of poverty and to raise the educational standard of the regions in which the children live. See part iii & schedule o for details.

What it reported doing in 2024

Using 'teacher training funds' to purchase teaching materials and to conduct training seminars for schools located in the poorest regions of china in order to enhance the effectiveness of teaching. Schools in china received teaching materials and/or held seminars using the teacher training funds in 2024. See attachment a, schedule to form 990 part iii for reference. Using 'library funds' to purchase books for schools located in the poorest regions of china. Schools received books bought with the library funds in 2024. See attachment a, schedule to form 990 part iii for reference. Using 'student magazine funds' to publish the foundation's magazine, peacher, which collects articles from scholarship recipients and serves as a vehicle for them to share ideas and enhance writing skills. See attachment a, schedule to form 990 part iii for reference. Using 'myanmar project funds', 'thailand project funds', and 'cambodia project funds' to help the poorest children to obtain education from middle schools to colleges and train teachers to obtain better teaching skills. See attachment a, schedule to form 990 part iii for reference.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 79% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 91% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. 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: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.3%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 84%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $151.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 90; 90th 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.3%; rating input score 99; 49th 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: 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: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 41.9%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.59; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.3%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.3% of revenue deployed · 84% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $970K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $50K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 55/100.