Texas Charter Schools Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 262920798
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Austin, TX, USA
- Phone
- 5125848272
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Alliance/Advocacy Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $8,421,771
- Expenses
- $6,691,532
- Assets
- $15,793,815
- Liabilities
- $2,237,007
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
26 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- NATALIE KAHARICK (CEO / COO (UNTIL 7/19/24))
- STARLEE COLEMAN (CEO (UNTIL 7/19/24))
Highest reported compensation
- NATALIE KAHARICK (CEO / COO (UNTIL 7/19/24)): $260,485 total reported compensation
- BRYCE ADAMS (VP OF GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS): $190,514 total reported compensation
- STARLEE COLEMAN (CEO (UNTIL 7/19/24)): $182,697 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Texas public charter schools association's (tpcsa) mission is to support and advocate for a policy and regulatory climate that ensures every student in Texas has access to ever-improving public school options.
What it reported doing in 2024
Texas publc charter schools association (tpcsa) has four core functions:1. Advocacy - tpcsa promotes a unified policy agenda that promotes charter school growth and protects the special mission of member schools. 2. Member services - tpcsa provides services and professional development to help member schools meet their training requirements. 3. Public awareness - tpcsa informs the public about charter schools and their effectiveness. 4. Annual conference - tpcsa conducts an annual conference to promote training, compliance and professional development.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 89% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 61
- Transparency & Controls: 80
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 63
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 57.8%; rating input score 58
- Program expense ratio: 75.8%; rating input score 76
- Fundraising efficiency: $7.84 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Pass
- 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: 94.9%; rating input score 95; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 20.5%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.36; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 20.8%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 15.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 57.8% of revenue deployed · 75.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $260K · 26 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $232K reported
- Consistency: 30 of 32 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 16 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 10 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 30/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.