Thiebaut Method

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
352348013
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022, Form 990-N 2010
Location
E Palo Alto, CA, USA
Phone
6504854877
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$391,198
Expenses
$344,580
Assets
$87,346
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Paul Thiebaut III (Chairman): $125,167 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Thiebaut (tebow) Method (TM) is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization that catalyzes human intrinsic motivation into real world goals and actions intended to add value to the lives of other people. By empowering underserved youth to use their intrinsic motivations to help others, TM exposes youth to people, ideas, skills, talents, and knowledge that enlarge their understanding of the world, reveal purpose-driven college and career aspirations, and put them on a trajectory to break the cycle of poverty.

What it reported doing in 2022

The Social Good Project (SGP) program empowers underserved youth in grades 4-8 to become community service leaders by designing and leading projects that benefit others in their community. Youth research the issue they address, design promotional materials, recruit donors, volunteers and beneficiaries, collaborate with professional mentors, and organize and host events. SGPs teach underserved youth how to become community service leaders by being the designers and providers of social services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.6%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 87%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $18.92 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.9%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 36.3%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.5% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.6% of revenue deployed · 87% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 7 board members independent · 0 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $300K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $125K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2014 to 2022
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.