Ridgecrest Elementary Academy for Language, Music, and Science

Legal name: Ridgecrest Charter School DBA REALMS

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330963233
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Ridgecrest, California, USA
Phone
7603751010
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Charter Schools

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,266,296
Expenses
$4,282,058
Assets
$4,220,223
Liabilities
$297,815

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Elsa Hennings (President)
  • Travis Reed (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Donald Beene (Superintendent thru Dec 2025): $162,400 total reported compensation
  • Nancy O'Sullivan (SuperIntendent): $154,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to provide proven resources and strategies to children so they can become resilient, confident, and resourceful, to create a better world for themselves and others.

What it reported doing in 2024

REALMS is a free TK-6th grade public charter school, serving the educational needs of students in and around the area of Ridgecrest, California. REALMS holds the belief that all students have the capacity to learn and grow in an environment conducive to their needs. All students receive instruction in STEM and music education in addition to grade level core curriculum content. REALMS provides a rigorous educational program that emphasizes the development of basic skills such as reading, writing, speaking, computation, and development of problem-solving skills with a global perspective. REALMS serves approximately 225 students for 180 instructional days.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 99% 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: 82
  • Accountability: 85
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 55.2%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 67.2%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • 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: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 18.7%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.99; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.4%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 55.2% of revenue deployed · 67.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $162K · 7 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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 55/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.