Paideia Academy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
061725440
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Apple Valley, MN, USA
Phone
9529536200
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Charter Schools

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,156,706
Expenses
$4,277,842
Assets
$2,059,442
Liabilities
$2,881,460

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MARCI LEVY-MAGUIRE (SCHOOL DIRECTOR): $107,402 total reported compensation
  • HEIDI JOHNSON (DIRECTOR/TEACHER): $57,521 total reported compensation
  • SUSAN KELNBERGER (DIRECTOR/TEACHER): $39,524 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To challenge and inspire learners by engaging each student in a rigorous, content-rich education incorporating classical studies, languages, music, and the arts while nurturing positive character development.

What it reported doing in 2014

Paideia provides an innovative and quality education program for 375 students in grades k-8 using a combination of the core knowledge sequence and a classical curriculum that sets high, but attainable standards. Paideia established a learning community of students, teachers, and parents that models and encourages character development, respect for diversity, and a sense of responsibility. In january, 2015, paideia academy was designated a high quality charter school by the Minnesota department of education, recognizing our status in the top 10% of charter schools and in the top 30% of public schools in Minnesota for the second year in a row.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 97% 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. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.2%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 86.7%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 10th 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: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: -2.9%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.48; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.4; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.2% of revenue deployed · 86.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $107K · 13 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $112K reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2010 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.