Monarch Learning Center Charter School

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680455686
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Redding, CA, USA
Phone
5302477307
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Charter Schools

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,641,134
Expenses
$1,871,680
Assets
$853,589
Liabilities
$495,090

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TERRY ALBERTSON (PRESIDENT)
  • STEPHANIE DYE (VICE-PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ETHAN COHEN (DIRECTOR): $122,849 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 cultivate an active family community where parents and staff together provide "more" individual, real, personal, and conceptual learning for each student.

What it reported doing in 2024

Monarch learning center is a small public charter school, located in redding, California. Currently, we have 5 classrooms, with roughly 90 students from tk through 8th grade. We pride ourselves on knowing each and every student and their parents by name. This makes school a much more personal endeavor. Having fewer students also gives us the ability to customize education for students who need something a little different. We have created an environment where all students feel welcome and are free from worrying about safety. In the past year, we have concentrated on improving technology. We have enough chromebooks for each student. We also have two retired teachers on staff helping with interventions. Monarch has also added the nwea assessment three times a year in order to collect more data on student improvement.

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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 67.4%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 8 of 8 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: 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: -14%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.46; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.58; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.6%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77% of revenue deployed · 67.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $123K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.
  • Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.