Charity Navigator's ratings previously did not consider Leadership & Adaptability, Culture & Community, or Impact & Measurement. The historic rating mainly reflects a version of today’s Accountability and Finance score. More information on our previous rating methodologies can be found on our rating methodology page.
Rating histories are available for a growing number of rated organizations. Check back later to see if this organization has a rating history!
Puget Sound Engineering & Science Scholarship Fund cannot currently be evaluated by our Accountability & Finance methodology due to only having one year of electronically-filed IRS Form 990 data.
To ensure year-to-year consistency the Encompass Rating System's Accountability & Finance beacon analyzes the three-year average of some data provided through the IRS 990.
Charity Navigator currently only has one year of consecutive e-filed Forms 990 from the IRS for Puget Sound Engineering & Science Scholarship Fund under the EIN: 91-2048970.
Before Charity Navigator can evaluate Puget Sound Engineering & Science Scholarship Fund, Puget Sound Engineering & Science Scholarship Fund will need to e-file for additional fiscal years.
This chart displays the trend of revenue and expenses over the past several years for this organization, as reported on their IRS Form 990.
Click or hover over the bar to see exact $ amount
Salary of Key Persons - Data Available
Presented here are up to five of this organization's highest compensated employees. This compensation data includes salary, cash bonuses, and expense accounts and is displayed exactly how it is reported to the IRS. The amounts do not include nontaxable benefits, deferred compensation, or other amounts not reported on Form W-2. In some cases, these amounts may include compensation from related organizations. Read the IRS policies for compensation reporting
Ralph Graves, Board Chairman
$0
Geoffrey Compeau, Board President
$0
James M Rigsby, Board Vice President
$0
Richard Beseler, Board Secretary
$0
Pamela Chelgren-koterba, Board Treasurer
$0
Source: IRS Form 990 (page 7), filing year 2023
IRS Published Data (Business Master File) - Data Available
Organization which receives a substantial part of its support from a governmental unit or the general public 170(b)(1)(A)(vi) (BMF foundation code: 15)
Affiliation:
Independent - the organization is an independent organization or an independent auxiliary (i.e., not affiliated with a National, Regional, or Geographic grouping of organizations). (BMF affiliation code: 3)
Data Sources (IRS Forms 990) - Data Available
The Form 990 is a document that nonprofit organizations file with the IRS annually. We leverage accountability and finance data from it to form Encompass ratings. Click here to search for this organization's Forms 990 on the IRS website (if any are available). Simply enter the organization's name (Puget Sound Engineering & Science Scholarship Fund) or EIN (912048970) in the 'Search Term' field.
Impact & Measurement
Score
93
This beacon estimates the actual impact a charity has on the lives of those it serves, and determines whether it is making good use of donor resources to achieve that impact.
$1,914 increases income for a scholarship recipient by $3,670
Program Context
Puget Sound Engineering & Science Scholarships: The nonprofit grants scholarships to beneficiaries.
Data Time Period
01/01/2023 to 12/31/2023
Benchmark for Scoring
Impact scores of postsecondary scholarship programs are based on income generated relative to cost. Programs receive an Impact score of 100 if they increase income for a recipient by more than $1.50 for every $1 spent and a score of 80 if income increases by more than $0.85 for every $1 spent. If a nonprofit reports impact but doesn't meet the benchmark for cost-effectiveness, it earns a score of 65. This program increases income for a scholarship recipient by more than $1.50 for every $1 spent.
Methodology
This impact score was determined through the Postsecondary Scholarships methodology which is fully detailed in the Charity Navigator Guide to Ratings. Analysis conducted in 2024 by Charity Navigator's acquired branch, ImpactMatters, using publicly available data from nonprofits and IRS forms 990, theory and evidence from scientific research studies.
Data Source
The nonprofit submitted data on the dollar value of all scholarships it grants and the number of scholarship recipients, which we use to calculate the additional income that the nonprofit's scholarship program generates.
Measurement
71 out of 100 points
25% of Impact & Measurement score
Full Credit
Partial Credit
No Credit
The Measuring Outcomes assessment evaluates how well a charity tracks progress towards its mission's outcomes.
Displayed below are the responses provided by the charity for the Measuring Outcomes assessment. Each question is designed to address specific criteria, with responses eligible for full, partial, or no credit. Please refer to the scoring rubric for details on how responses are scored.
Selected program: Grant college scholarships in science and engineering., Submitted Jul-24
Program Planning and Design
17 out of 21 points
This section assesses the use of crucial evaluation tools in program objective-setting and activities.
Charity leadership uses information collected to make decisions regarding programs
Agree, uses information collected to improve programs
Charity has shared understanding across staff of how programs lead to the goals a program achieves
Agree, has universal understanding of how programs achieve goals
Charity has documents and reviews how program activities lead to change
Disagree, does not document or review
Charity revisits how program activities lead to change
Agree, does revisit how program activities lead to change
Program Development
19 out of 28 points
This section assesses the consideration of stakeholders in program objectives and activities.
Charity identifies program target population needs in the following ways
Discussions or surveys with target population on how program activities best serve their needs
Charity considers practical, cultural, and political needs and interests of those served by program
Partially agree, charity is responsive to some practical, cultural, or political needs
Charity uses SMART Goals
Agree, identified Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-Bound (SMART) goals
Data Collection and Analysis
11 out of 21 points
This section assesses the best practices used in collecting and analyzing program data.
Charity tracks program information in the following ways
Collects data before a program is initiated
Charity collects programmatic information on those served by the program in the following ways
Identifies the number of those served by program
Charity assesses program effectiveness at multiple points in time
Agree, collects information before and after a program is implemented
Reporting and Distribution of Results
21 out of 21 points
This section assesses reporting and disseminating program results.
Charity reports program results to key stakeholders
Reports results to stakeholders
Does not report results to stakeholders
Charity reports both favorable and unfavorable results
Yes, charity reports both favorable of unfavorable results
Use of Results
4 out of 10 points
This section assesses the use of results to guide learning.
Charity uses program results to inform future work for the following reasons
Sustain and secure funding
Improve program operations
Culture & Community
Not Currently Scored
Puget Sound Engineering & Science Scholarship Fund cannot currently be evaluated by our Culture & Community methodology because we have not received data from the charity regarding its Constituent Feedback or Equity Practices strategies.
Note: The absence of a score does not indicate a positive or negative assessment, it only indicates that we have not yet evaluated the organization.
Puget Sound Engineering & Science Scholarship Fund cannot currently be evaluated by our Leadership & Adaptability methodology because we have not received data from the charity regarding its leadership capacity, strategic thinking and planning, and ability to innovate or respond to changes.
Note: The absence of a score does not indicate a positive or negative assessment, it only indicates that we have not yet evaluated the organization.