Young Eisner Scholars

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272633827
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Inglewood, CA, USA
Phone
3104191800
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$891,057
Expenses
$2,235,460
Assets
$6,090,278
Liabilities
$105,062

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Rebecca Tucker (Former Ex. Dir.): $159,444 total reported compensation
  • Eric Eisner (Founder/Preside): $14,432 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Dedicated to promoting America's promise of equal opportunity for equal talent, Young Eisner Scholars ("YES Scholars") identifies promising young students from low-income communities in Los Angeles, New York City, and (Cont. on Sched. O)

What it reported doing in 2024

YES support begins once scholars are identified in the 6th grade (and sometimes as early as elementary school). We utilize a data driven approach to student support, consisting of three scaffolded phases, each focused on developing core skills and providing essential supplemental resources to ensure that students are competitive with their more privileged counterparts. Our middle school programming is centered around a rigorous math and logic curriculum designed to improve critical thinking, literacy, and self expression, as well as prepare them for admittance to competitive independent high schools. Middle school scholars also participate in robust summer programming designed to build cultural capital and prevent academic summer backslides. Armed with what they've learned from our (Cont. on Sched. O)

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 85% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 55% for direct work, and 45% for grants.

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: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 71.2%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.06 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 21st 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -150.9%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.72; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.8%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 71.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $159K · 9 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 44/100.