Brooklyn Free School
Legal name: Brooklyn Free School Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 201506040
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2021
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2021
- Location
- Brooklyn, NY, United States
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,186,918
- Expenses
- $902,339
- Assets
- $1,491,901
- Liabilities
- $384,900
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Monique Scott (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Monique Scott (Executive Director): $75,000 total reported compensation
- Alan P Berger (Finance Manager): $26,400 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Brooklyn Free School’s mission is education for social justice. Always advocating for young people’s voices to be heard, BFS engages students and staff in democratic decision-making and problem solving. We honor student choice and facilitate student-centered learning through play and exploration, constructivist teaching, collaborative course work and self-directed student initiatives. We support social and emotional development through conflict mediation, personal reflection, diversity awareness and community responsibility. BFS works in the service of students and their families, partners with progressive educators, and embraces our larger community.
What it reported doing in 2021
Students learned about and practiced social justice. They acquired knowledge and skills in numerous subject areas. Students practiced self-directed learning, community building and democratic decision-making using consensus building and problem solving methods during school hours.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 77% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 89
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 78
- Sustainability: 67
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- 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: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 77.8%; rating input score 78; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 58.7%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.65; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11.2%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -6.7% per year; rating input score 0; 4th 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: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $902K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $75K · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 43 of 43 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2014 to 2021
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.