Hanger Hall School Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
861145430
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Asheville, NC, USA
Phone
8282583600
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Secondary, High School

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,475,377
Expenses
$1,506,820
Assets
$2,099,815
Liabilities
$1,093,431

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sally Porter (President)
  • Ani Buraglia (Vice-President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Jennifer Schoolfield (Head of School-Retiring): $100,320 total reported compensation
  • Katherine Conner (Head of School-7/1/2025): $68,908 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Hanger Hall provides each student with a superior middle school education in an inclusive and supportive environment that promotes a sense of belonging, creativity, self-confidence, personal motivation and a desire for knowledge. In partnership with parents, Hanger Hall encourages students to develop the living and learning skills necessary to succeed in life and contribute to the betterment of the world.

What it reported doing in 2024

Academic Program: Hanger Halls rigorous academic program empowers students with a strong foundation in core subjects, fostering critical thinking, problem-solving, and collaboration In the past year, 100% of students achieved proficiency or above on standardized testing benchmarks, with 80% excelling beyond grade level in at least one subject. . The programs small class sizes (average student-to-teacher ratio: 14:1) ensure personalized instruction and robust engagement. 100% of students participate in enrichment opportunities, including honors-level coursework and STEM-focused projects. . Our graduates success reflects the programs effectiveness: 95% of alumni from the past five years have matriculated into their top-choice high schools with many earning academic scholarships.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 90% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 88% 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.
  • 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.7%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 85.3%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.84 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.1%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.39; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.52; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.2%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.7% of revenue deployed · 85.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $100K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 8/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.