Julian Charter School Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330894086
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Julian, CA, US
Phone
(760) 765-5500
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Charter Schools

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$26,076,060
Expenses
$26,631,354
Assets
$30,736,221
Liabilities
$25,663,446

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TANYA ROGERS (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JENNIFER CAUZZA (SUPERINTENDENT): $240,567 total reported compensation
  • DANA BELCHER (DIRECTOR OF SPECIAL EDUCATION): $177,386 total reported compensation
  • JILLIAN TONKIN (PRINCIPAL, JCS PINE HILLS): $177,015 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

JCS offers both Home Study and Academy options. We are one school, with many programs, designed to meet the needs of the students we serve.

What it reported doing in 2024

Operation of six schools: the julian charter school (jcs) family of charter schools are wasc-accredited, public charter schools serving students tk-12 mainly in san diego and riverside counties encouraging students to become independent lifelong learners. The curriculum at jcs is designed to be flexible enough to work with parents' visions while providing structure and support for students through personalized learning designed to draw out student strengths. At jcs parents are partners in the educational process, they are watching their child grow into becoming an independent, self-directed learner. Our vision: empower learners with eductional choice!

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 99% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.9%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 73.1%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • 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: -2.1%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.15; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.83; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.9%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 7 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 74.9% of revenue deployed · 73.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $19.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $241K · 13 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.2M reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.