Emily Fisher Charter School of Advanced

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
223567419
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2010
Forms available
Form 990 2010
Location
Trenton, NJ, USA
Phone
6096561946
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Charter Schools

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,083,109
Expenses
$8,215,737
Assets
$1,148,897
Liabilities
$857,459

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

It is the mission of Emily Fisher Charter School to ignite a love of learning in all students regardless of their educational background. Emily Fisher Charter School of Advanced Studies is committed to providing a child-centered education of superior quality. Enrolling students in Grades 5 to 12, the objective of Emily Fisher Charter School is educating the whole child, while fostering intellectual, creative, social and physical development.

What it reported doing in 2010

Emily fisher charter school for advanced studies provides a full range of educational services appropriate for all students in grades 5 through 12. The educational program includes social, health and nutrition services that support the total education of the students and their families. The charter school completed the 2010-2011 school year with an enrollment of 384 students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 99% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 59th 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.6%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.14; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.75; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.3%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $90K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.