Kansas City Girls Preparatory Academy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
814691824
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Kansas City, MO, USA
Phone
8162682573
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Charter Schools

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,753,315
Expenses
$5,253,625
Assets
$1,309,784
Liabilities
$269,038

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR NICOLE SMITH (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR NICOLE SMITH (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $80,422 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of Kansas city girls preparatory academy is to develop young women to use their voices, succeed in college, and lead meaningful impactful lives. The school serves neighborhoods impacted by segregation and is free, public, and open enrollment. It is an affiliate of the young women's leadership network, a national network of single-gender schools, and is sponsored by the Missouri charter public school commission.

What it reported doing in 2024

Girls prep opened its doors in august 2019, to a promising class of 75 fifth grade girls and their extraordinarily supportive families. Fortunately, the ingenuity of students, families, and the team and board ensured a continued focus on supporting scholars to maximize their potential even during the pandemic. Founding year results include:1) enrollment the school enrolled 75 5th grade students and retained 89% of students at the end of the year. Students represented the full diversity of Kansas city's east side neighborhoods in terms of race/ethnicity, economic status, special education needs, and english language learning needs.2) academics the school was founded to create equitable access to excellent education. As expected, students arrived in 5th grade with literacy and numeracy skills ranging from kindergarten to 4th grade proficiency. Due to teachers' balance of rigor and support, students achieved rapid growth. In just five months of instruction, for example, fully 1/3 of students grew out of the "below basic" performance category in mathematics on standardized assessments. 3) support during the pandemic the school quickly fundraised for and issued chromebooks and wi-fi devices to all students after the start of the pandemic. Instruction continued, and families were supported with weekly meal kits (5 breakfasts and lunches) delivered to their homes for all children under age 18.4) finances the school balanced conservative expense forecasts, tight spending management, and a proactive fundraising strategy to limit costs while earning the distinction of being the first school in Missouri to win grants from the highly selective new schools venture fund. The school also earned support from other selective national funders like the charter school growth fund and the federal department of education. These grants, in combination with an incredibly supportive local philanthropic community, have fully funded the middle school facility and start-up costs.5) team development the school is strongly committed to high quality development for its team in order to maximize student growth. For example, the school is part of two selective, national cohorts of high-performing schools to aid development in its social emotional learning and mathematics instruction. The team works with the nationally recognized experts in literacy special education, and teaching english as a second language. Investments in professional development aligned to researched-based best practices have maximized student growth.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 72% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 67.4%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: 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: -10.5%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.5%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75% of revenue deployed · 67.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $80K · 12 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $806K reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and related organizations
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.