Brighten Academy Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 571218112
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Douglasville, GA, USA
- Phone
- 7706153680
- Rating
- 89
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Charter Schools
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $10,338,852
- Expenses
- $10,423,123
- Assets
- $16,045,516
- Liabilities
- $22,312,716
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DONNA DAVIS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- DEONA CARTER (VICE PRESIDENT)
- JAMILIA SMITH (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- DONNA DAVIS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $132,354 total reported compensation
- KELLY BEMUS (ASSISTANT DIRECTOR): $109,836 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide a productive learning environment with a highly qualified staff committed to using an innovative research based instructional model that produces measured growth in every student every year
What it reported doing in 2024
Brighten academy, inc is responsible for the public education of all students attending the school. The charter school was created through a contract between the douglas county school district and the charter school where by all state funding associated with the students attending the charter school and certain specified local funds are turned over to the charter school to cover the cost of its operations
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 90% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 81
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 37
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 91%; rating input score 91
- Program expense ratio: 90.3%; rating input score 90
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -0.8%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.54; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.39; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.3%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 91% of revenue deployed · 90.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $9.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $132K · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 12 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.