Purpose Preparatory Academy Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 460693776
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2011
- Location
- Nashville, TN, USA
- Phone
- 6157240705
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $9,112,259
- Expenses
- $8,127,988
- Assets
- $12,137,043
- Liabilities
- $3,440,584
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
18 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- LAGRA NEWMAN (HEAD OF SCHOOL): $258,950 total reported compensation
- BRANDY PUTNAM (DIRECTOR OF ACADEMICS): $135,499 total reported compensation
- COURTNEY BROOKS (DIRECTOR OF CURRICULUM AND): $131,162 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Through rigorous curriculum, high-quality instruction, and positive character development, purpose preparatory academy charter school ensures that all kindergarten through grade four students achieve the academic skills, knowledge, and ethical foundation to be set on the path to college.
What it reported doing in 2024
Purpose prep provides an academically challenging, disciplined, and joyful elementary school to children of nashville. With an intensive focus on the acquisition of essential literacy skills, purpose prep provides targeted and rigorous instruction in each core subject to meet the academic needs of every scholar. Purpose prep holds scholars accountable for demonstrating excellent behavior by teaching them the character skills necessary for their success, specifically the school's rise with purpose values - purpose, respect, integrity, self-determination, and excellence.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 84% 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 total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 63
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 53
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 56.6%; rating input score 57
- Program expense ratio: 62.1%; rating input score 62
- Fundraising efficiency: $3,388.01 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- 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: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Limited
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 10.8%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.49; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.6%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 14.9% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 18.5% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 56.6% of revenue deployed · 62.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $259K · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $1.1M reported
- Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.