Inland Leaders Charter Schools
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 208343378
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Yucaipa, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9094461100
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Education
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $14,682,992
- Expenses
- $12,062,423
- Assets
- $24,879,125
- Liabilities
- $1,448,190
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MIKE GORDON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- MIKE GORDON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $269,310 total reported compensation
- STEVEN PERRY (COORDINATOR OF STUDENT SERVICES): $211,949 total reported compensation
- JOSHUA OSBORN (PRINCIPAL): $200,905 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Ilcs is committed to providing a world-class education for students that will equip them with the critical 21st century skills necessary to be successful in life. This will be accomplished as we: innovate practices, accelerate achievement, cultivate leadership.
What it reported doing in 2024
Inland leaders charter school (ilcs) is a kindergarten, including transitional kindergarten (tk) through 8th-grade public charter school dedicated to creating leaders for the 21st century. The vision of ilcs is to sustain a high-quality community charter school founded upon innovative instruction and character education to create 21st-century leaders.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 96% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 82
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 68
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 73.6%; rating input score 74
- Program expense ratio: 88.6%; rating input score 89
- Fundraising efficiency: $10,291.99 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 17.8%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.06; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.4%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 15.3% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 73.6% of revenue deployed · 88.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $10.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $269K · 11 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $494K reported
- Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 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.
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: Document-retention policy not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
- Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.