Queen City Academy Charter School

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
223611500
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Plainfield, NJ, USA
Phone
9087534700
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Primary, Elementary Schools

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,153,666
Expenses
$8,576,285
Assets
$13,711,048
Liabilities
$2,300,866

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KAREN OLIVER-MOORE (President)
  • HENRY MCCLOUD (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • DANIELLE WEST-AUGUSTIN (DIRECTOR OF SCH): $218,876 total reported compensation
  • ERNEST DIXON (PRINCIPAL): $151,420 total reported compensation
  • JAZMIN GOODING (DEAN OF GUIDANCE): $144,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Queen city academy charter school provides a full range of educational services appropriate to grade levels kindergarten through eight. These services include regular, as well as special education and basic skills instruction. (see sch o).

What it reported doing in 2024

Queen city academy charter school provides a full range of educational services appropriate to grade levels kindergarten through twelve. These services include regular, as well as special education and basic skills instruction. Queen city academy charter school completed the 2024-2025 school year with an enrollment of 435 students, which enrollment has been consistent for several years. This is attributable to the expansion of the school facility and capability of offering the queen city academy program to more students.

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 - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.6%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 69.8%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 23.1%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.6; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.6%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.6% of revenue deployed · 69.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $219K · 14 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.2M reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 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 54/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.