We Teach Science Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263861047
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Alameda, CA, USA
Phone
5102289112
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Interdisciplinary Research

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$-78,183
Expenses
$257,275
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

People named in this filing

  • JOHN GNUSE (TREASURER)
  • DAVID LOW (CHAIRMAN)
  • GERALD LUIZ (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. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We connect science technology engineering and math (s.t.e.m.) professionals with middle and high school students for remote tutoring and mentoring (rtm).

What it reported doing in 2017

Founded in 2008, the mission of we teach science foundation is to motivate and inspire youth (especially those from disadvantaged households) to achieve excellence in the discpilines of math and science. The remote tutoring and mentoring (rtm) program matches students with volunteer professionals (mentors) in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and math (stem) with the goal to improve math and science skills while simultaneously exposing participants to the relevance of those skills in the work place and career opportunitites.

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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 72.5%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.92 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -429.1%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -14.1% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -12% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -20.3% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 72.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $186K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2012 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.