The Charles River School Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 042103974
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Dover, MA, USA
- Phone
- 5087850068
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Primary, Elementary Schools
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $11,132,022
- Expenses
- $11,367,729
- Assets
- $31,495,959
- Liabilities
- $9,307,374
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
29 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- GABRIEL BURNSTEIN (HEAD OF SCHOOL): $338,634 total reported compensation
- ELIZABETH CLAYTON (ASSOC. HEAD OF SCHOOL (UNTIL 6/2025)): $169,225 total reported compensation
- KATHERINE WHITTEN (DIR. OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT): $151,896 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
A pre-kindergarten through grade 8 independent school committed to academic excellence and the joy of childhood, fostering intellectual curiosity, critical thinking, and the development of the whole child.
What it reported doing in 2024
Summer program - crs summer is the summer session of charles river school serving campers ages 4-15. The program offers structured experiences in performing and visual arts, nature studies, stem, leadership development, and athletics. Through hands-on, age-appropriate activities, participants explore personal interests, build skills, and strengthen social connections in a safe and engaging environment that supports both enrichment and academic growth.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 86% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 82% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 61
- Transparency & Controls: 87
- Accountability: 56
- Sustainability: 40
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 66.7%; rating input score 67
- Program expense ratio: 65.5%; rating input score 66
- Fundraising efficiency: $4.95 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 31.8%; rating input score 32; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: -2.1%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.77; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.6%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 66.7% of revenue deployed · 65.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 22 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $7.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $339K · 29 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $1.2M reported
- Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
- Schedules: 9 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: 7 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.
- Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 32/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 20/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.