National Association of Charter School Authorizers

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841553195
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3123762300
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,758,930
Expenses
$5,165,426
Assets
$4,887,177
Liabilities
$404,549

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARCUS KAREGA RAUSCH (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARCUS KAREGA RAUSCH (CEO): $351,791 total reported compensation
  • GUERSCHMIDE SAINT-ANGE - CHIEF (OPERATING OF): $225,273 total reported compensation
  • ELISA WESTAPHER - CHIEF DEVELOPMENT (& BUSINESS O): $216,601 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 promote the establishment and operation of quality charter schools through responsible oversight in the public interest. Nacsa serves the education and resource needs of the full range of chartering authorities across the country, whose work is vital to enhancing educational opportunities for students and servicing the needs of parents, educators and community leaders for greater educational accountability of our public schools.

What it reported doing in 2024

Capacity building nacsa recognizes that building strong organizational capacity among the nation's charter school authorizers is essential for overall sector improvement. Nacsa's capacity building initiatives work to strengthen authorizing organizations by developing their internal capabilities, cultivating high-potential talent, and fostering a robust network of current and future effective leaders to enhance retention and sustainability. Nacsa's capacity building efforts include its leaders program, the leaders alumni program, an introductory bootcamp delivered in multiple formats, various cohorts responding to contextual and landscape- based needs, and other targeted asynchronous and synchronous learning opportunities designed to strengthen organizational effectiveness and leadership development. Policy + research nacsa engages public officials and education policy organizations across the nation to advance strong charter school authorizing policies and practices. Nacsa collaborates with charter and education policy organizations to provide data and evidence to influence policymakers and promote policies that improve outcomes for students. Nacsa's research focuses on identifying and tracking active charter authorizers nationwide; analyzing the academic performance of authorizer charter school portfolios; investigating the implementation of charter school authorizing practices nationally; and pursuing research that informs nacsa's policy and advocacy objectives. Nacsa's strategy, research and policy team is also charged with evaluating nacsa's progress toward its strategic plan goals. Membership nacsa was founded by and continues to serve a diverse array of authorizing agencies, including state education agencies, school districts, colleges and universities, special purpose or independent chartering boards, municipalities, and not-for-profit organizations. Several active and former authorizers serve along with non-authorizers on the nacsa board of directors. Nacsa publishes issue briefs, case studies, and monographs. Nacsa also hosts a webinar series, creates opportunities for shared learning via virtual cohorts, and facilitates meetings that bring together members to discuss special topics of common concern. Member feedback is also solicited throughout the year and nacsa continues to find ways to facilitate sharing and dialogue among members. Members are also connected to other nacsa divisions if they seek additional knowledge or are looking for more customized resources.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.3%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 82.8%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $22.54 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 62; 62nd 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: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 21st 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: 23.6%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.95; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 36.2%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.6% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.2% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.3% of revenue deployed · 82.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $4.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $352K · 21 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $650K reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.