Acaciawood School
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 330718663
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Anaheim, CA, USA
- Phone
- 7149951800
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,851,153
- Expenses
- $1,723,578
- Assets
- $816,118
- Liabilities
- $11,447
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JIM MILLER (PRESIDENT/DIR.)
Highest reported compensation
- JIM MILLER (PRESIDENT/DIR.): $60,000 total reported compensation
- JAMES KUAN (Director): $4,262 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Education
What it reported doing in 2024
Acaciawood school educated 124 students in grades 1 - 12 for the academic year beginning in august 2024 and ending in july 2025.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 86% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 88
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 68
- Sustainability: 47
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 96.2%; rating input score 96
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 6.9%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.47; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.7%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $60K · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.