Pacific View Charter School

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943353802
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Eureka, CA, USA
Phone
7072699490
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,244,454
Expenses
$2,916,491
Assets
$2,120,901
Liabilities
$837,436

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DALE STOCKLY (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • BOBBY MULLINS (PRINCIPAL): $141,631 total reported compensation
  • JAMES MALLOY (DIRECTOR/CLERK): $47,270 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to improve the lives of all students through a program focused on nurturing and educating while supporting parental choice and individualized instruction resulting in measurably increased student knowledge and understanding.

What it reported doing in 2024

Pacific view charter school 2.0 is an independent non-classroom based charter school sponsored by the eureka unified school district. We serve about 160 students in humboldt county. We offer two types of academic programs, non-classroom based instruction and independent study. Students in kindergarten through 6th grade have both non-classroom based instruction and independent study available. Students in grades 7th & 8th have only independent study available. Students in grades 9th through 12th have both non-classroom based instruction and independent study available. We provide preparatory coursework for college bound students as well as for students entering the workforce. We offer an on-line curriculum that allows students to access the curriculum at school or home anytime of the day.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 98% 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. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 35
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 38%; rating input score 38
  • Program expense ratio: 41.6%; rating input score 42
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.1%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.73; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.39; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.5%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.1% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 38% of revenue deployed · 41.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $142K · 6 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $179K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 38/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 44/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.