Norwood School Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 520901098
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Bethesda, MD, USA
- Phone
- 3013652595
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Primary, Elementary Schools
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $28,711,323
- Expenses
- $24,049,257
- Assets
- $77,343,970
- Liabilities
- $29,062,357
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
27 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- MATTHEW A GOULD (HEAD OF SCHOOL): $675,621 total reported compensation
- WILLIAM C TEACHUM (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE & OPERATIONS): $252,518 total reported compensation
- MICHAEL RISEN (ASSOC. HEAD OF SCHOOL & MIDDLE SCHOOL): $209,204 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Norwood school's child-centered program inspires confident, compassionate, independent, and creative thinkers who embrace lifelong learning.
What it reported doing in 2024
Founded in 1952, norwood school is a coeducational independent school for grades pk-8. The school's approach to instruction and learning begins with a team of teachers whose first priority is to fully understand each and every student. Only by understanding each learner can we create "just right" academic experiences where every child is stretched but not stressed. Our focus on inclusion and respect creates a culture where students and teachers are genuinely interested in learning about one another and the world beyond our school. Norwood is accredited by the association of independent Maryland schools.all income and expenses are incurred through the operation of an independent school grades pk through 8 with 451 students. In addition to tuition revenue, norwood school generates revenue through the operations of a summer camp and after school auxiliary programs.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 89% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 86% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - 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: 71
- Transparency & Controls: 91
- Accountability: 92
- Sustainability: 68
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 78.6%; rating input score 79
- Program expense ratio: 79.5%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: $2.01 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 95%; rating input score 95; 28th 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: 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: 16.2%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.22; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.4%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 78.6% of revenue deployed · 79.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 19 of 20 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $19.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $676K · 27 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $1.9M reported
- Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 7 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 6/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.