The College Preparatory School

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
941492272
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2023
Location
Oakland, CA, USA
Phone
5106520111
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Secondary, High School

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$31,493,027
Expenses
$23,668,097
Assets
$102,122,451
Liabilities
$19,873,766

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

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MONIQUE DEVANE (HEAD OF SCHOOL): $889,938 total reported compensation
  • THANH TRAN (CFO): $367,203 total reported compensation
  • SCOTT MATTOON (ASSISTANT HOS/ACADEMIC DEAN): $269,836 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 College Preparatory School's mission is to provide a challenging academic education in a diverse, inclusive community that fosters intellectual curiosity, ethical responsibility, and a lifelong love of learning.

What it reported doing in 2024

The college preparatory school is an independent, co-educational day school in oakland, California, grades 9 through 12. For the 2024-25 school year, the college preparatory school provided an inspiring education to 373 students, 24% of whom received approximately $3.4 million in need-based financial aid. In june 2025, 90 seniors graduated, with 89 matriculating to u.s. Universities and 1 to an international university.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 74% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 81% 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 most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.9%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 75.5%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: 24.8%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.31; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.6%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 57.9% of revenue deployed · 75.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $17.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $890K · 29 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.5M reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 12 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 15/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.