The San Marcos Promise

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
465460510
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2014, Form 990-N 2013
Location
San Marcos, CA, USA
Phone
7604029090
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,192,312
Expenses
$1,385,855
Assets
$587,069
Liabilities
$106

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LISA STOUT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LISA STOUT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $216,941 total reported compensation
  • SARA MONTOOTH (PROGRAMS COORDINATOR): $164,102 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Project next transforms how high school students prepare for life after graduation by embedding career readiness and workforce development directly on campus through future centers. In partnership with school districts and more than 400 local professionals and businesses, we equip students with the clarity, confidence, and connections needed to transition successfully into higher education, career training, military service, or living wage employment.

What it reported doing in 2024

Project next operates five on campus future centers serving high school students across san marcos and escondido. These centers function as year-round, high touch workforce readiness hubs embedded within partner schools. During the fiscal year: students visited future centers more than 5,300 times. Career coaches delivered over 1,300 individualized coaching sessions to nearly 900 students. 470 students completed the superstrong interest assessment to align strengths with career pathways. 392 students completed fafsa or cadaa applications with direct support. More than 2,400 student touchpoints were generated through 90 career readiness events. Over 400 professionals representing 130 plus companies engaged directly with students.equity is central to our model. Among participants in our structured cohort programs: 85 percent were socioeconomically disadvantaged. 64 to 78 percent were first generation college bound. Up to 92 percent identified as students of color.focused futures, our two-year college and career exploration program, served 109 students. Seventy five percent completed the year with a defined post-graduation plan and 72 percent are pursuing higher education or career training.xcelerate workforce pathway served 83 students who were not initially planning to pursue college. By year end, 87 percent had applied to or enrolled in postsecondary education, career training, military service, or employment pathways with stronger wage and growth potential.through interview skills day, skillshops, career chats, company site visits, and regional connect to careers events, students gained practical experience in networking, interviewing, financial literacy, and professional communication.project next aligns education with industry to strengthen the north county talent pipeline. Our cross-sector model ensures students graduate not only with a diploma, but with a viable, informed pathway toward economic mobility.during the 2023 fiscal year, the san marcos promise rebranded as project next to reflect the expansion of its mission, geography, and services. The organization retained its original EIN and legal entity status. The rebrand aligns with a broader regional footprint and an evolved strategic focus on systemic college and career readiness. Originally founded in 2014 to administer the pace promise scholarship program, the organization shifted its strategy in 2019 to establish on campus future centers within san marcos unified school district high schools. Recognizing the need for earlier and more comprehensive intervention, the organization expanded into escondido union high school district and now operates five future centers across multiple districts. The name project next reflects the organization's expanded regional reach and its commitment to helping students identify and pursue their next best step after graduation. No structural or governance changes accompanied the rebrand.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.4%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 53.6%; rating input score 54
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.87 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -16.2%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.42; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.5%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.8% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.4% of revenue deployed · 53.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $742K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $217K · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 17/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.