The Garden Christian Academy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
822532223
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2021
Forms available
Form 990 2021, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Cleveland, OH, USA
Phone
2163523408
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Primary, Elementary Schools
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$494,842
Expenses
$475,872
Assets
$96,812
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • DANIELLE PISCURA (HEAD OF SCHO): $40,000 total reported compensation
  • STEPHEN PISCURA (TREASURER): $38,462 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide youth with a distinguished, christ-centered education.

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 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.7%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 79.7%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $21.78 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 19th 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.8%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.2; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.5%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 69.1% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 45.9% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.4% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.7% of revenue deployed · 79.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $379K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $40K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2018 to 2021
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.