Central Brooklyn Ascend Charter School

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
461745205
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Brooklyn, NY, USA
Phone
3477130100
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Charter Schools

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,896,981
Expenses
$4,963,261
Assets
$3,185,018
Liabilities
$2,636,349

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEPHANIE MAUTERSTOCK (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHELLE FLOWERS (SCHOOL DIRECTOR): $138,021 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Central brooklyn ascend charter school's (the "school") mission is to equip every student with the knowledge, confidence, and character to succeed in college and beyond. The school will span kindergarten through the 12th grade at maturity. (continued on schedule o) from the earliest grades, students will steadily build a strong foundation of learning habits, critical thinking skills, and knowledge; excel academically in the middle and high school, mastering high-level math and science; and graduate as confident young adults, prepared to succeed as college students, as citizens, and as leaders in their chosen fields.

What it reported doing in 2015

For the 2015-2016 school year, we served approximately 234 students in kindergarten and first grade.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 86% 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 81.9%; rating input score 82
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.4%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.64; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.83; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.8%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 56.2% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 36.9% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 75.5% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83% of revenue deployed · 81.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $138K · 7 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $478K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2014 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
  • 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 28/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.