De La Salle Academy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133228140
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2123165840
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,966,995
Expenses
$7,622,541
Assets
$15,090,131
Liabilities
$1,959,258

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

34 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • ANGEL GONZALEZ (HEAD OF SCHOOL): $313,059 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL TAPSCOTT (ASSISTANT HEAD OF SCHOOL): $163,542 total reported compensation
  • DOROTHY TAYLOR (DIRECTOR OF ADVANCEMENT): $162,038 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

See schedule o.

What it reported doing in 2024

In 2024-2025, de la salle academy provided 133 academically talented and economically less advantaged adolescents in grades six through eight with a spiritually nurturing and academically challenging environment they needed to ensure bright futures. Students take a rigorous and accelerated curriculum that has exposure to a broader range of social and spiritual values that are not present in the normal school curriculum. No student who qualified for admission has been turned away because of a family's financial situation. Tuition and fees, net of financial aid scholarships to the students, accounted for less than 10% of the total revenue of the academy.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 62% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 50% for direct work, and 50% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 93
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 81.1%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.66 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 96.4%; rating input score 96; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • 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: -27.7%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.98; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.8%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 81.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 27 of 28 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $313K · 34 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $135K reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 11/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.