Bradley Academy Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 820862492
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2017–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Atlanta, GA, USA
- Rating confidence
- Limited
- Sector
- Youth Development Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $64,500
- Expenses
- $64,500
- Assets
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
People named in this filing
- Naomi Bradley (FounderDirector)
- Walter Bradley (CFO)
- Shanvis Glenn (Teacher)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our vision is to develop well rounded confident and responsible humans who aspire to achieve their full potential through educational resources..We will do this by providing a welcoming happy safe and supportive learning environment in which everyone is celebrated for their individual and special contributions to the World.
What it reported doing in 2025
Bradley Academy organized five major field trips and multiple in-school enrichment events impacting more than 85 students across age groups. These included visits to Fernbank Museum Atlanta-area parks and hands-on science experiences. These programs were designed to expose students to opportunities beyond their economic means sparking curiosity and reinforcing classroom learning. Parental engagement increased and students demonstrated improved critical thinking and real-world application of classroom concepts.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 96% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 28
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -13.6% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -44.7% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.