Alliance College-ready Middle Academy #7

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
273739336
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
2139434930
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Undergraduate College (4-year)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$105,827
Expenses
$1,807,012
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JUDY BURTON UNTIL 7115 (DIRECTOR/CEO)
  • DAN KATZIR (DIRECTOR/CEO)
  • HOWARD LAPPIN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAN KATZIR (DIRECTOR/CEO): $254,966 total reported compensation
  • DAVID HYUN (CFO/COO): $247,000 total reported compensation
  • JUDY BURTON UNTIL 7115 (DIRECTOR/CEO): $237,538 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose and mission of alliance college-ready middle academy #7 is to establish and maintain the highest-quality educational program for middle-grade students in a small school environment with small learning communities that are focused on assuring that students achieve proficient to advanced student performance on state standards.

What it reported doing in 2015

Alliance college-ready middle academy no. 7 ("crma no. 7 or the "school") is a nonprofit public charter school designed to serve 375 grade 6 through 8 students in the los angeles unified school district (the "district") on a 180-day, single-track, non-year-round calendar.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 89% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Affiliate network. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending through affiliated organizations.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 66
  • Sustainability: 5
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 99.4%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1,607.5%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.9%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -27.6% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 99.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 4 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $255K · 6 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 28 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.