New Life Academy Educational Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411915933
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Woodbury, MN, USA
Phone
6514594121
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,101,802
Expenses
$1,053,436
Assets
$3,656,781
Liabilities
$17,076

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Melissa Porter (President)
  • Josh Brocker (Vice President)
  • Steve Hamill (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Larry Chinn (Development Director): $110,354 total reported compensation
  • Ilene Firth (Treasurer): $97,358 total reported compensation
  • Brandon Mellet (Trustee): $88,530 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 support the educational endeavors of New Life Academy.

What it reported doing in 2024

New Life Academy Educational Foundation exists to benefit the education of New Life Academy of Woodbury. New Life Academy is a school with several hundred students. The foundation was formed to raise funds for the school to help with ongoing expenses, capital expenses and campaigns and future scholarship opportunities. All income raised goes toward the education expansion and growth of New Life Academy. New Life Academy is a pre-kindergarten to 12th grade school and is fully accredited by the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.4%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 75.7%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 4.4%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.47; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.5%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 28.2% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.9% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.4% of revenue deployed · 75.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $798K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $110K · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.