National Accelerator of Autism Charter Schools

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
921325521
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
San Antonio, TX, USA
Phone
4805406283
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$52,471
Expenses
$221,041
Assets
$568,448
Liabilities
$9,930

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Megan Vincent (Executive Director (from 10/25))

Highest reported compensation

  • Megan Vincent (Executive Director (from 10/25)): $150,208 total reported compensation
  • Diana Diaz-Harrison (Vice Chair): $8,000 total reported compensation
  • Tamara Moodie (Member): $7,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

See Schedule OThe mission of the National Accelerator of Autism Charter Schools (NAACS) is to support founding teams committed to starting Autism-Focused Charter Schools by offering fellowships, training, resources, and a national network of support. Our vision is to accelerate the opening of an Autism Charter School in every major city in America.

What it reported doing in 2025

The NAACS Fellowship offers a comprehensive one-year program designed for founding school teams committed to opening an autism-focused charter school. Teams will visit NAACS Demonstration Sites in Arizona and Florida four times during the school year for immersive training in active autism school settings. The goal will be to equip founding teams to lead an evidence-based, autism-focused charter school that is compliant with public charter laws. The NAACS Fellowship focuses on training in competencies essential to running a successful autism-focused school.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 59.6%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -321.3%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.57; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 74.7%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -85.3% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.5% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 59.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $132K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $150K · 9 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $150K reported
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.