Purpose Built Schools Atlanta

Legal name: Purpose Built Schools Atlanta Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
811114844
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2021, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
Phone
(404) 802-6399
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$37,644,239
Expenses
$36,616,660
Assets
$7,548,710
Liabilities
$3,385,664

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL A DAVIS (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL A DAVIS (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $260,397 total reported compensation
  • DR NIKKITA WARFIELD (CHIEF OF SCHOOLS): $259,887 total reported compensation
  • NATASHA HOGAN-MAHAN (PRINCIPAL): $217,948 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To empower students to become change agents who create positive, long-lasting impact in their communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

To address the critical need for wraparound services, pbsa facilitated the establishment of pbsa community engagement, inc. ("cei"). Cei was formed with the specific mission of delivering essential services that complement and strengthen the core instructional programs in schools operated by pbsa.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 87% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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

STRONG - 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: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.3%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 92.8%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.7%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.21; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.45; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.2%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 90.3% of revenue deployed · 92.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $34M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $260K · 14 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $317K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.