Foundations Community Academy Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 991754798
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Hazel, KY, USA
- Phone
- 2702937075
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $53,735
- Expenses
- $24,693
- Assets
- $29,042
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Hailey Roach (President)
People named in this filing
- Allison Robertson (Treasurer)
- Hailey Roach (President)
- Shea Sykes (Director)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The purpose of Foundations Community Academy, Inc. is to establish, maintain, promote, and operate an educational institution that will function as a hybrid Christian school. The school will operate in a manner that has some characteristics of a traditional Christian education and some characteristics of a homeschool co-op. Learning will take place both in a schoolhouse and at home, with the highest regard given to a quality academic education as well as an emphasis on Christian principles and values.
What it reported doing in 2024
During our initial year, we secured a place to have classes and renovated the space to make it adequate for teaching. We have registered 34 students and are awaiting the first school year.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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 a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 62
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 73
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 43.2%; rating input score 43
- Program expense ratio: 94%; rating input score 94
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 54%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.18; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 43.2% of revenue deployed · 94% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $23K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.