Legacy Traditional School - Goodyear

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
833474101
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Chandler, AZ, USA
Phone
4802705438
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,379,459
Expenses
$7,200,085
Assets
$9,964,889
Liabilities
$11,730,115

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATHY SENSEMAN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KRISTEN SMITH (PRINCIPAL): $167,097 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide motivated students with the opportunity to achieve academic excellence in an accelerated, back-to-basics, safe learning environment taught by caring, knowledgeable, and highly effective educators in cooperation with supportive, involved parents.

What it reported doing in 2024

During the current year, the organization provided high quality educational services to approximately 583 students in kindergarten through 8th grade at its campus in goodyear, Arizona. Those students experienced a well-rounded education that included reading, writing, mathematics, science, social studies, history, music, art, and physical education, as well as extracurricular activities including athletics, clubs, field trips, and daily tutoring.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 83% 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.7%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 78.4%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 2.4%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.38; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.18; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.3%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.9% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 22.9% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.7% of revenue deployed · 78.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $167K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $1.1M reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 21 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.