Newark Legacy Charter School

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
271093552
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Newark, NJ, USA
Phone
9733747000
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Charter Schools

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,802,603
Expenses
$11,760,005
Assets
$8,444,742
Liabilities
$3,017,844

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MIRTHA SABIO (PRESIDENT)
  • EVERETT M JOHNSON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KENNETH SCHUTZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KENNETH SCHUTZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $162,500 total reported compensation
  • LISA POWELL (CHIEF ACADEMIC OFFICER): $131,695 total reported compensation
  • DARICE GONZALEZ (SBA): $129,359 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

See below:

What it reported doing in 2015

The organization is a charter school and as such it operates as a public school district under the approved charter granted by the state of New Jersey to provide thorough and efficient education to the students of its community.during the fiscal year ended 06/30/2015. The school served about 613 children in kindergarten through sixth grade.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 79% 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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.9%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 68.5%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.1%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.72; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.36; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.6%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 46% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 34.6% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 49.5% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.9% of revenue deployed · 68.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $8.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $162K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $464K reported
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2013 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.