Legacy Academy for Jewish Education Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 821088660
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Granada Hills, CA, USA
- Phone
- 5707688888
- Rating
- 67
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12
- Affiliation
- Judaism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,819,071
- Expenses
- $1,510,119
- Assets
- $882,479
- Liabilities
- $191,763
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MALKA BOJARSKI (Vice President)
- NAFTALI SMITH (President)
Highest reported compensation
- SOFIA DOYLE (PRINCIPAL): $107,310 total reported compensation
- MALKA BOJARSKI (Vice President): $82,387 total reported compensation
- MENACHEM SEEWALD (Treasurer): $6,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Legacy Academy was created to serve the Jewish community in the Los Angeles area. We began with a philosophy that every child should have a school that will help them to thrive academically, socially and emotionally. The multi age learning environment that students learn in encourages students of all ages to learn from each other and care for one another. Students spend time learning in small groups that tailor to each groups needs and goals. Teachers work to understand each child and develop a learning environment that will allow each child to work at a pace and focus that is best suited for him or her. By providing students with a safe environment for individualized learning, students feel comfortable and willing to learn new skills and concepts. We focus on helping students develop a willingness to try, work hard and think critically. 3 points to our Philosophy: Meaningful Education: our goal is to provide educational curriculum that engages students minds, hearts and souls. We beli
What it reported doing in 2024
We designed our school as a collaborative program where parents are deeply involved in the school. Parents help to choose curriculum, organize events, teach classes (both academic and extra curricular) and are always welcome to come learn with their students because we have an open door policy for all parents, all day. All students participate in the California homeschool charter network and receive guidance from California credentialed teachers to provide thorough oversight. We have enjoyed growth from 32 kids at the beginning of our first year to 63 at the beginning of our second year. We feel that 50-60 kids in our program is an appropriate amount for the type of education environment we are creating, but would like to develop to two full programs: one for boys and one for girls, with approximately 50 in each.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 66% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 62
- Transparency & Controls: 64
- Accountability: 79
- Sustainability: 49
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 64.7%; rating input score 65
- Program expense ratio: 78%; rating input score 78
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 17%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.58; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 13%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 17.7% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 22.5% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 35.6% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 64.7% of revenue deployed · 78% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $107K · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.