Nasha Shkola

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
371662315
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Brooklyn Park, MN, USA
Phone
9527461880
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,419,278
Expenses
$2,002,341
Assets
$913,434
Liabilities
$1,229,153

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Yelena Hardcopf (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Yelena Hardcopf (Executive Director): $79,557 total reported compensation
  • Natalya Johnson (Secretary - Teacher): $57,779 total reported compensation
  • Mary Moen (Member - Teacher): $42,918 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Nasha Skola aspires to be a multi-cultural charter school comitted to exceptional education in all areas of academic inquiry with an emphasis on Russian language and culture, providing structured and responsive learning environment based upon educational best practices for all students and their families.

What it reported doing in 2024

Nasha Shkola successfully met its World's Best Workforce (WBWF) goals, demonstrating strong student achievement and progress. In the Ready for School category, 80% of kindergarten students met their growth target in the Spring NWEA MAP Reading assessment, while 73.3% met their target in Math. The school also excelled in Closing the Achievement Gap, with EL students outperforming the local school district by 16.5 in MCA Math and 12.7 percentage points in MCA Reading. Additionally, Nasha Shkola English Learners' progress toward English Proficiency Targets outperformed the State by 46.1% points and Osseo by 44.2% points. These achievements highlight the school's commitment to academic growth and equity for all students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 100% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.9%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 83.2%; rating input score 83
  • 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.2%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.46; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.35; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.9% of revenue deployed · 83.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $80K · 7 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $605K reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.