The Classical Academies
Legal name: The Classical Academy Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 330857665
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Escondido, CA, US
- Phone
- 760-842-8000
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Primary, Elementary Schools
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $82,127,317
- Expenses
- $78,410,112
- Assets
- $157,378,992
- Liabilities
- $122,187,299
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Cameron Curry (Past Chief Executive Officer)
- Kurt Indorf (CEO)
- Charlene Smith (Executive Director of Education)
Highest reported compensation
- Carmencita M Coniglio (CFO): $326,908 total reported compensation
- Mark Kalpakgian (COO): $306,328 total reported compensation
- Corinna L Coffey (Director of Student Support): $278,865 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Mission of The Classical Academies is to partner with families to inspire each student to think critically, communicate effectively, and achieve excellence by providing academic choice.
What it reported doing in 2024
The Classical Academy, Inc operates two separate charter school (K-8), one high school, and one online school. It assists parents in their mission to develop exemplary young citizens with superior academic proficiency, analytical thinking skills, a passion for learning and virtuous character, all built upon a solid foundation of knowledge.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 98% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 70
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 49
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 77.5%; rating input score 77
- Program expense ratio: 80.9%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 6th 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: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 4.5%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.01; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.78; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.3%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 20.1% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 19.3% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 19.5% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 4 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 77.5% of revenue deployed · 80.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $63.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $327K · 20 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.2M reported
- Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Independent members within voting members did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.