Khan Lab School

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
465742553
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Mountain View, CA, USA
Phone
6504890071
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,879,955
Expenses
$10,299,461
Assets
$23,337,924
Liabilities
$17,283,435

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RAKHI SINGH (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • KIMBERLY DOW (Executive Dir.): $452,811 total reported compensation
  • KATE ANTHONY (CFO): $215,424 total reported compensation
  • LAURA HANEY (U/S DIRECTOR): $153,259 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Khan lab school is a community of learners empowering every student to navigate their own path.

What it reported doing in 2024

School programing - khan lab school was founded in 2014 by salman "sal" khan (founder of khan academy) based on the vision for education articulated in his book the one world schoolhouse: education reimagined. As a laboratory school, we are dedicated to research-based instruction and furthering innovation in education. Thanks to our association with khan academy, we leverage the power of technology to better personalize the classroom. Khan lab school is a full-year, full-day, mastery-based program without the encumbrance of letter grades. Our constant is mastery and our variable is the time in which mastery takes for each student. We strive to find the right balance between hands-on guidance and space for autonomous learning. Kls serves students k-12.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 88% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 85
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.7%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 89.8%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.1 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 17th 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: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.3%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.27; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.74; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.8%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.6% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.4% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.8% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.7% of revenue deployed · 89.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $9.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $453K · 13 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 25/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.