Learning for Life Charter School

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
770544185
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Marina, CA, USA
Phone
8315829820
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Specialized Education Institutions

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,910,013
Expenses
$2,755,470
Assets
$1,363,177
Liabilities
$344,177

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KENNETH LAWRENCE-EMANUEL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • KENNETH LAWRENCE-EMANUEL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/CEO): $194,209 total reported compensation
  • BARBARA LAWRENCE-EMANUEL (ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR): $178,982 total reported compensation
  • BASEL ALDERI (CHIEF BUSINESS OFFICER): $147,448 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Enabling students in grades 712 who had dropped out or are at risk of dropping out of traditional schools to become motivated again to learn, complete their secondary education, and earn their high school diploma.

What it reported doing in 2024

Operation of a public charter school: our school was founded in 2001, with the mission of enabling students in grades 7-12 who had dropped out or are at risk of dropping out of traditional schools to become motivated again to learn, complete their secondary education, and earn their high school diploma. Since 2014, lflcs has been reinventing itself, and now includes a digital learning environment that supports students who are also college-bound. We have open enrollment for anyone within the monterey, salinas, san benito, and santa cruz school districts.

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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.9%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 59.9%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • 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: 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: 5.3%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.49; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.9%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.3% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.9% of revenue deployed · 59.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $194K · 9 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $102K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.