Laurel Tree Charter School

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
452661454
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Arcata, CA, USA
Phone
7078225626
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Charter Schools

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,379,717
Expenses
$3,203,583
Assets
$3,909,609
Liabilities
$2,893,229

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOSH NIKOLAUSON (PRESIDENT/LEAD TEACHER)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRENDA SUTTER (DIRECTOR/LEAD TEACHER): $103,131 total reported compensation
  • JOSH NIKOLAUSON (PRESIDENT/LEAD TEACHER): $88,163 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Laurel tree charter school's mission is to create a sustainable model of education which provides all students with accessible curriculum, based on college preparatory standards while developing life and social skills in a mixed-age setting.

What it reported doing in 2024

Laurel tree charter school is a public charter school serving students in grades tk (transitional kindergarten) to 8. Students engage in the forwardlooking principles of permaculture and sustainability. To live sustainably requires foundations of cultural ingenuity, community will, and an intimate knowledge of the place in which we live. Beginning with these foundations, we as teachers must give our students the skills they will need to succeed in a changing world. Laurel tree's academic structure is based on multigrade classrooms within primary, middle, and high school groups. Students will work in small, mixedage classes based on their developmental and social needs, rather than in specific age groupings or grade levels.

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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 86.5%; rating input score 86
  • 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.2%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.22; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.74; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.8% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82% of revenue deployed · 86.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $103K · 9 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $250K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 47/100.