Tulsa Regional STEM Alliance Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
814051559
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Tulsa, OK, USA
Phone
9187794910
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,607,676
Expenses
$2,075,268
Assets
$1,021,775
Liabilities
$353,684

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Levi Patrick (Executive Dir.): $132,484 total reported compensation
  • Emily Mortimer (VP Ecosystems): $105,712 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Cultivate impactful partnerships and learning pathways that inspire and prepare all youth for a stem-enabled future.

What it reported doing in 2024

Curriculum & Resources: Expenses - $235,172; Grants - $18,968Tulsa Regional STEM Alliance is dedicated to providing educators with access to high-quality instructional materials. Lack of access to resources or quality curriculum can limit an educators ability to provide valuable learning experiences for students. This especially impacts students from underserved and underrepresented populations who experience lower per student spending on instruction. TRSA provides access to these resources and curriculum, so youth are surrounded by opportunities that excite them about STEM, propel them forward, and generate confidence in facilitating STEM experiences for educators. Key projects in 2024 included expansion of STEM Shoppe resources saving schools nearly $350,000; the second and final year of the OpenSciEd Elementary Science curriculum pilot that will make excellent elementary curriculum free across Oklahoma; over 12,000 STEM in a Bags helping to ensure families and communities can access STEM anywhere in our community, and $25,000 in grants for in- and out-of-school time STEM curriculum and resources.Professional Development: Expenses - $196,652; Grants - $10,143The Professional Development program ensures that educators across Northeastern Oklahoma are confident in facilitating STEM experiences in order to drive student success. To achieve this outcome, educators should view TRSA as a trusted source for evidence-based resources and pathways that will help inspire and prepare students. Key projects in 2024 included the continuation of SENSEsational Science PD and Exponential Growth Math PD, along with numerous training opportunities designed to expand capacity for STEM educators across Oklahoma.Ecosystem: Expenses - $241,644; Grants - $22,000TRSA recognizes the importance of partners to build a diverse and robust STEM ecosystem. It is the goal of TRSA for STEM Ecosystem Partners to value their membership because it strengthens and amplifies their work and that of the Alliance. The major investment for 2024 was the ongoing development of Momentum, a digital badge project that serves as an underpinning strategy for continuous improvement and collective impact for our partners. 400 badges were issued in 2024! PEAR evaluation services were also made freely available for all Alliance partners.Other: Expenses - $591,022; Grants - $77,558Various programs conducted throughout 2024 including summer and school year STEM camps, programs, and competitions.

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 90% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.7%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 60.9%; rating input score 61
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.91 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 29.8%; rating input score 30; 27th 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -29.1%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.49; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.35; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.5%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.7% of revenue deployed · 60.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $132K · 22 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $387K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 30/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.