James Jordan Middle School

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
030557700
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Reseda, CA, USA
Phone
8188822496
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Charter Schools

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,379,788
Expenses
$9,210,292
Assets
$19,219,767
Liabilities
$14,197,371

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MYRANDA MARSH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MYRANDA MARSH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $202,592 total reported compensation
  • GRISELDA LARA (PRINCIPAL): $183,161 total reported compensation
  • VICTOR ALBORES (COO): $171,704 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

James jordan middle school is a small learning community for middle school students in grades 6-8. The school is dedicated to the ideal that all students should be prepared to succeed at a four-year university.

What it reported doing in 2024

James jordan middle school prepares approximately 456 students to meet the highest standards of personal character and develop the skills and self-efficacy necessary for successful completion of the a-g requirements in high school, with a plan for enrollment at a four-year college, entry into a productive career, and an active membership in their community.

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. Liabilities are high compared with assets and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.6%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 76.3%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1,635.15 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

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: 11.3%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.09; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.74; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.3% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.6% of revenue deployed · 76.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $203K · 11 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $762K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 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 — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.