Magnolia Educational and Research Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 954649884
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Phone
- 7148925066
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Educational Services and Schools - Other
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $86,364,539
- Expenses
- $84,439,598
- Assets
- $100,711,421
- Liabilities
- $92,111,932
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ALFREDO RUBALCAVA (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- ALFREDO RUBALCAVA (CEO): $287,563 total reported compensation
- ERDINC ACAR (DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT): $235,642 total reported compensation
- SUAT ACAR (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $220,945 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Magnolia public schools provides a college preparatory educational program emphasizing science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics (steam) in a safe environment that cultivates respect for self and others.
What it reported doing in 2024
Magnolia educational and research foundation (merf) operates ten magnolia science academies (msa) serving 3,794 students in grades kindergarten through twelve throughout California. The organization is dedicated to inspiring students to choose career paths in science, technology, engineering, and math (stem), while providing a robust, standards-based education program within a supportive culture of excellence. To ensure students have the tools to succeed, the organization offer the following programs, which are mostlyfree of charge:-academic programs-student support programs-after school programs-parent involvement programs
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 92% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 57
- Transparency & Controls: 80
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 63.3%; rating input score 63
- Program expense ratio: 64.7%; rating input score 65
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- 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; 77th 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: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 2.2%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.19; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.91; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.4%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 13.4% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 63.3% of revenue deployed · 64.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $54.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $288K · 14 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.2M reported
- Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.