ICEF Public Schools

Legal name: Inner City Education Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954548521
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Los Angeles, CA, US
Phone
(323) 290-6900
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Secondary, High School

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$55,355,641
Expenses
$49,610,556
Assets
$86,844,824
Liabilities
$50,923,669

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PARKER HUDNUT (CEO (LEFT 12/24))
  • TYANTHONY DAVIS (CEO (START 12/24))

Highest reported compensation

  • PARKER HUDNUT (CEO (LEFT 12/24)): $381,270 total reported compensation
  • SHURON OWENS (CHIEF ACADEMIC OFFICER): $205,185 total reported compensation
  • LAURA HAYES (ALDER PROGRAM DIRECTOR): $175,443 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

ICEF Public Schools is a Charter Management Organization (CMO) with seven public charter schools governed by a nonprofit board of directors.

What it reported doing in 2024

Icef public schools operates 7 charter schools that provide classroom based instruction including music and art education for students in grades tk through 12. Serving 2,056 students, icef schools are located in neighborhoods with low performing traditional schools in los angeles.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 97% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and liabilities are high compared with assets.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.9%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 91.2%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • 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; 77th 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: 10.4%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.75; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.59; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.9%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 81.9% of revenue deployed · 91.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $45.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $381K · 15 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $476K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 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.

  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.