Amazing Grace Virtual Academy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
461419809
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2013
Location
New Ulm, MN, US
Phone
262-308-7844
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$387,510
Expenses
$352,573
Assets
$437,200
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • David Rust (Superintendent/Principal): $49,706 total reported compensation
  • Emily Platzer (Technology Director): $43,059 total reported compensation
  • James Grunwald (Financial Director): $29,777 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Amazing Grace Virtual Academy provides a Christ-centered, high-quality online education that expands curricular offerings for students in grades 7-12, serving Lutheran, public, and homeschool families.

What it reported doing in 2025

Create online courses that meet the needs of WELS and ELS schools to expand their course offerings. No new courses were created in 2025-26, but several existing courses were revised as new instructors took over. Over 60 courses are available to WELS/ELS schools. An estimated two additional courses will become available by 2027-28, plus several existing courses will be revised.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 93% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 58.2%; rating input score 58
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.24; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 34.8%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.6% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.6% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.6% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 56% of revenue deployed · 58.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $205K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $50K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.