Olive Grove Charter Schools Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 471825238
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Santa Maria, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8056231111
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Education
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $7,351,652
- Expenses
- $6,282,040
- Assets
- $5,271,410
- Liabilities
- $1,483,647
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Deb Willems (President)
- Jackie Heidt (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- MEG RYDMAN (Superintendent): $187,771 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of the olive grove charter school is to plan, monitor, and assist in the education of students k-12 in a home or blended school learning environment enabling them to speak, read, write, use technology, and calculate effectively to become self-motivated, competent, and life-long learners. The olive grove charter school will provide students with the necessary resources to achieve success and meet state standards in core academic subjects appropriate to their level. Additionally, students will become career/college ready upon completion of the program. This will be achieved in a collaborative effort with parents as primary deliverers of the educational program, certificated teachers and the community.
What it reported doing in 2024
5 California public charter schools providing first rate education to 400 students in kindergarten through twelfth grade.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 94% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 61
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 54
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 65.5%; rating input score 65
- Program expense ratio: 76.4%; rating input score 76
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
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: Pass
- 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: 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- 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: 14.5%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.84; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 16.9% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 65.5% of revenue deployed · 76.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $188K · 6 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $492K reported
- Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.
- Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.