Summit Academy Management

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
341938197
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Akron, OH, USA
Phone
3306708470
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$42,472,333
Expenses
$47,534,729
Assets
$29,068,066
Liabilities
$10,992,534

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN GUYER (CEO)
  • HEATHER SINGER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF CURR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN GUYER (CEO): $225,000 total reported compensation
  • MARK MICHAEL (DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS): $196,056 total reported compensation
  • AMY COLE (VP OF HR): $169,876 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

It is the mission of summit academy management to design, develop, and deliver eductional opportunities in a theraputic environment so everyone can learn.

What it reported doing in 2024

Summit academy management provided support for twenty-four charter schools during their 2025 fiscal year pursuant to a management contract. This included human resources, payroll, and other office services. Summit academy management was also responsible for purchasing the expenses related to the operation of the charter schools which included, but was not limited to the following: assets, buildings, occupancy needs, and supplies. The organization also provided staff for, and keeps developing a curriculum designed for, the charter schools' student population.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.4%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 87.8%; rating input score 88
  • 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: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: -11.9%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.61; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.8%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.4% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.4% of revenue deployed · 87.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $41.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $225K · 18 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $998K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 41 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 24 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.