The Heights Charter

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
460727872
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Alpine, CA, USA
Phone
6197929000
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Charter Schools

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,831,491
Expenses
$3,608,999
Assets
$3,693,912
Liabilities
$1,683,018

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • DIANA WHYTE (Executive Dir.): $148,805 total reported compensation
  • NICOLE VAN SHURA JONES (AST DIR / TEACHER): $119,897 total reported compensation
  • KIMBERLY KOENIG (SPEC ED DIR/PSY.D): $118,986 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 heights charter is founded on the belief that all children are born with the capacity for excellence. Our goal is to enable students to become self-motivated, competent, and lifelong learners. We provide students with a rigorous, standards-based program within a small school nurturing environment that incorporates strong family and community ties. To this end, we offer a non-traditional k-8 independent study program, individually designed curriculum and direction.

What it reported doing in 2024

The purpose of the organization is to provide education to children in grades k-8 through the operation of a California charter school

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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.5%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 86.1%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 11th 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: 5.8%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.02; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.46; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.6%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 20% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.5% of revenue deployed · 86.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 6 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $149K · 10 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $390K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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.

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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.