The Learning Accelerator

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
461059054
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
2072008432
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,861,481
Expenses
$4,210,806
Assets
$2,560,484
Liabilities
$275,533

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CAROLYN ELIZABETH RABBITT (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • CAROLYN ELIZABETH RABBITT (CEO): $313,940 total reported compensation
  • BETH HOLLAND (PARTNER, RESEARCH & MEASUREMENT): $165,380 total reported compensation
  • ASHLEY FELLOWS (PARTNER): $146,123 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 learning accelerator is building an education field where practitioners, leaders, and policy makers learn faster and change systems together to ensure every child receives the effective, equitable, and engaging education they need to reach their full and unique potential. Our mission is to accelerate individual, organizational, and sector learning to transform k-12 education.

What it reported doing in 2024

The learning accelerator (tla) is building an education field where everyone learns faster and change systems together to ensure every child reaches their unique potential. Tla works across the education sector to help practitioners, leaders, and policy makers learn faster from success and innovation and apply that knowledge to improve how tla is educating students. Tla researches and investigates; tla documents and publishes; and tla connects, collaborates, and builds coalitions. Tla helps school systems improve and offers expertise in areas including emerging technologies, school models, and systems of support.during 2024, tla launched over 10 new organizations and products, produced more than 150 unique insights and tools, established over 300 diverse organizational partnerships, engaged with more than 650 district, system, and sector leaders, developed over 2,000 actionable strategies and resources, and facilitated more than 185,000 yearly interactions with educators.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 68% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 66% for direct work, and 34% for grants.

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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 93
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 78
  • Sustainability: 14
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 93.1%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $19.8 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th 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: 99.4%; rating input score 99; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 15th 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: -126.2%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.61; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 28.3%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 93.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $314K · 16 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $334K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 20 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 12 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.