Up for Ed Co David Yeager

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
275370529
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2013, Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
8668793373
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$192,552
Expenses
$291,942
Assets
$21,320
Liabilities
$454

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEPHEN ROSEN (President)

People named in this filing

  • SHELLI KURTH (Secretary)
  • LAURA KOHN (Treasurer)
  • HANK MARXEN (Board Member)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

UPforEd believes every child dserves a high quality education.Our mission is to substantially increase all students' achievement within San Diego Unified School District by supporting children through a parent-led organization. By uniting parent voices, we ensure that the needs of students are the priority in decision making. UPforEd encourages and supports the transformation of San Diego Unified into a world-class school district.

What it reported doing in 2014

Site trainings and team development of leaders dedicated to improving schools. Provide information to parents and community regarding current school issues and school board decisions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.1%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 38.3%; rating input score 38

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -51.6%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.07; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.2%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -106.3% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -140.1% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58.1% of revenue deployed · 38.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $112K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

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

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.