Indian Community School
Legal name: Indian Community School Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 391154960
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Franklin, WI, US
- Phone
- (414) 525-6100
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $29,573,473
- Expenses
- $19,237,376
- Assets
- $912,010,564
- Liabilities
- $56,845,265
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- BRIAN LEIBL (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $208,680 total reported compensation
- JASON DROPIK SCHOOL ADMIN ((TO 12/2024), COACH (AS OF 12/2024)): $176,433 total reported compensation
- RENEE MEYER (CONTROLLER): $162,623 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide a culturally relevant education that empowers Native American students to achieve academic excellence and preserve their heritage.
What it reported doing in 2024
Family resource center - ics's family resource center focuses on birth to k3 indian children and their families as well as the families of the k4 through 8th grade children that currently attend ics. The family resource center offers opportunities to educate parents in a variety of areas and encourages early parental involvement in their child's development and on-going education.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Affiliate-supported. 87% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 72
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 85
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 62.5%; rating input score 62
- Program expense ratio: 80.3%; rating input score 80
- Fundraising efficiency: $2,199.86 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: 35%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 47.41; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.1%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 62.5% of revenue deployed · 80.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $15.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $209K · 12 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $4.2M reported
- Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 15 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
- 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: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.