Lower Lights Leadership Academy
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 934101197
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Yuma, AZ, USA
- Rating
- 53
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Educational Services and Schools - Other
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $10,627
- Expenses
- $7,137
- Assets
- $3,490
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Nancy Beaumont Sorenson (President)
- Michal Price (Administrative Vice President)
- Jessica Weist (Member Relations Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Nancy Beaumont Sorenson (President)
- Michal Price (Administrative Vice President)
- Jessica Weist (Member Relations Vice President)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Lower Lights Leadership Academy is a homeschool co-op. We provide educational classes for the children of 26 families. Our classes cover subjects like history art STEM and writing. We serve children from birth to age 18 as well as their parents. We are a leadership Education community that gathers together to participate in Scholar Projects and Junior School Classes. We use Leadership Education to inspire our members. We meet once a week 16 days per semester.
What it reported doing in 2024
Lower Lights Leadership Academy provides weekly educational classes. We provide classes for approximately 70 children. The classes include art Physical Education Shakespeare literature studies history and science projects and nursery care.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 85% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 35
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 54
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 29.8%; rating input score 30
- Program expense ratio: 44.4%; rating input score 44
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 32.8%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.49; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 29.8% of revenue deployed · 44.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 30/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 44/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.