Ararat Charter School
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 272824791
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Van Nuys, CA, USA
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Charter Schools
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $6,908,919
- Expenses
- $6,691,940
- Assets
- $6,424,758
- Liabilities
- $1,360,449
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- AIDA TATIOSSIAN (Executive Dir.): $207,344 total reported compensation
- SAMANTHA PARISEN (ASST PRINCIPAL): $124,987 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Ararat charter is committed to educating students to their full potential in an environment that actively engages students in relevant programs and expected school wide learning results and standards.
What it reported doing in 2024
All curriculum design is aligned with the California state standards. 1 standardized testing required by the state will be caaspp assessments. 2 rubrics, projects, student portfolios and student exhibits are an integral part of our ongoing assessment of student progress. 3 lessons are taught across the disciplines through project-enhanced curriculum. 4 provide collaborative experiential learning environment for students to develop their interpersonal skills and nurture respect, civic responsibility and life-long learning.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 96% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 82
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 43
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 79.8%; rating input score 80
- Program expense ratio: 81.9%; rating input score 82
- Fundraising efficiency: $294.84 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 3.1%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.96; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 79.8% of revenue deployed · 81.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $207K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $512K reported
- Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 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.
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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 54/100.
- Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.