Elite Academic Academy - Mountain Empire

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
824502310
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Temecula, CA, USA
Phone
8663548302
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Charter Schools

Reported finances

Revenue
$16,901,712
Expenses
$16,545,725
Assets
$3,902,305
Liabilities
$2,324,794

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KENT CHRISTENSEN (BOARD PRESIDENT)
  • LINDSAY BURKETT (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MEGHAN FREEMAN (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • MEGHAN FREEMAN (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $406,387 total reported compensation
  • LAURA SPENCER (CHIEF ACADEMIC OFFICER): $263,259 total reported compensation
  • ASHLEA KIRKLAND (CHIEF STUDENT DEVELOPMENT): $245,788 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Elite academic academy - mountain empire was organized to manage and operate a k-12 public charter school.

What it reported doing in 2024

Elite academic academy - mountain empire is a California public benefit corporation that was organized to manage and operate a k-12 public charter school. The school provides personalized learning experience for approximately 979 students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 100% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.6%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 74.1%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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; 66th 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: Fail
    • 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: 2.1%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.24; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.6; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.5%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 22.9% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 21.2% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.8% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.6% of revenue deployed · 74.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $12.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $406K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $700K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.