Kinetic Academy
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 811454510
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Huntington Beach, CA, USA
- Phone
- 7144654565
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Charter Schools
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,713,143
- Expenses
- $5,580,284
- Assets
- $2,223,242
- Liabilities
- $1,141,933
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BRE LIONETTI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- BRE LIONETTI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $212,049 total reported compensation
- AMY VENTO (DIRECTOR OF STUDENT & INSTRUCTIONAL SERVICES): $157,223 total reported compensation
- TRICIA GALLAGHER (PRINCIPAL): $135,976 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Kinetic academy educates and inspires lifetime learners by promoting academic success, community involvement, collaboration, and providing as many varied experiences possible.
What it reported doing in 2024
Kinetic academy is a public charter school located in huntington beach, California. We are authorized by the huntington beach city school district. We currently serve students tk to 8th grade. We aim to implement a steam based curriculum via a project based learning model. Research, discussion, teamwork, design, math, and reflective writing are all incorporated into a single, engaging project. This is our goal. Additionally we offer enrichment in the form of foreign language, fine arts, physical education, and financial education.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 96% 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: 71
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 29
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 70.9%; rating input score 71
- Program expense ratio: 72.4%; rating input score 72
- Fundraising efficiency: $35.61 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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; 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: 2.3%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.4; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.51; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11.3%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 15.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 70.9% of revenue deployed · 72.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $212K · 8 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $569K reported
- Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.
- Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.