The Gray Charter School

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
223626543
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Newark, NJ, USA
Phone
9738246661
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,640,296
Expenses
$7,914,569
Assets
$3,250,388
Liabilities
$436,285

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PAULO DASILVEIRA (BOARD PRESIDENT)
  • VERNA GRAY (FOUNDER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRISTOPHER PRINGLE (ASSISTANT DIRECTOR/BOARD SECRETARY): $272,558 total reported compensation
  • VERNA GRAY (FOUNDER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $262,097 total reported compensation
  • IAN FALLSTICH (SCHOOL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATOR): $48,720 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 charter schools mission is to provide its diverse student body the best possible education by focusing on the fundamental academic disciplines in an atmosphere that affirms academic.

What it reported doing in 2024

The charter school provides a full range of educational services appropriate to grade levels k to 8. The services (that include special education students) are provided with the goal of achieving high level of excellence, improve student achievements and broaden the base of the community. During the year ended june 30, 2025, the charter school had average enrollment of approximately 316 students in grades k to 8.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 97% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.6%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 70.1%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.6%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.41; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.4%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.6% of revenue deployed · 70.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $273K · 7 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.