Parents at Woodland Hills Private School

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
471848981
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Woodland Hills, CA, USA
Phone
8183486563
Rating
90
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$48,298
Expenses
$15,129
Assets
$109,716
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALISON GUSSIN (CO-PRESIDENT)
  • DANA ASHMORE (CO-VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KATHERINE BERLYN (CO-PRESIDENT)
  • KATIE DUNCAN (CO-VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • LISA LEVY (BOARD MEMBER)
  • CHELSEA PARRISH (BOARD MEMBER)
  • ANNA KELLY (BOARD MEMBER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To promote family and community involvement in the continued educational success of the students through family events, community programs and social activities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Classroom and teacher support and development - to fund purchases for the classrooms to support an enrichment learning atmosphere and to provide assistance for teacher development and teacher appreciation

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 62% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 68.7%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.25; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.4% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 30.1% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $70K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 8 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.