Charter High School for Architecture & D

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
232996535
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
Philadelphia, PA, USA
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Secondary, High School

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,076,868
Expenses
$6,567,661
Assets
$1,566,472
Liabilities
$10,373,423

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LANCE ROTHSTEIN (PRESIDENT)
  • LAUREN DOUGHERTY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • HAROLD BRADY (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • HAROLD BRADY (CEO): $162,914 total reported compensation
  • ANDREW PHILLIPS (TEACHER): $122,887 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The charter high school for architecture and design (chad) is a learning community committed to an innovative program of study, integrating the design process with the mastery of a strong liberal arts education. The school offers each student the opportunity for success and the preparation for life-long learning and responsible citizenship. Chad if a thoughtful academic environment that engenders love of learning, intellectual curiosity, and new ways of seeing, and prepares students for higher education.

What it reported doing in 2019

A charter school providing high quality public education to students in grades 9-12 in philadelphia.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 72% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 46
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 43.1%; rating input score 43
  • Program expense ratio: 66.1%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 67th 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: 34.8%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.24; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 6.62; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.4%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 43.1% of revenue deployed · 66.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $163K · 10 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $511K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2009 to 2019
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.