The Schools of McKeel Academy

Legal name: The Schools of Mckeel Academy Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
650854467
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lakeland, FL, USA
Phone
8636804047
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$36,703,205
Expenses
$35,700,149
Assets
$42,983,168
Liabilities
$33,025,993

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHELE SPURGEON (PRESIDENT / DIRECTOR OF SCHOOLS)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALAN BLACK (CHIEF STRATEGIC OFFICER): $216,867 total reported compensation
  • MICHELE SPURGEON (PRESIDENT / DIRECTOR OF SCHOOLS): $185,197 total reported compensation
  • KIM BENSON (PRINCIPAL): $168,079 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To produce lifelong learners and leaders by providing a world-class collaborative educational experience through innovation and character building.

What it reported doing in 2024

The charter school provides an innovative technology based learning for students from pre-kindergarten through twelfth grade. Our teaching staff is devoted to the highest standards of education profession to meet and exceed the needs of our students with a focus on intergrating the latest technology in our curriculum. Our school is ranked a high preforming charter school. The charter school served an average of 3,430 students during the fiscal year ending june 30, 2025.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 90% 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.5%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 81.6%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

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: 2.7%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.2; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.77; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.8%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.6% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 79.5% of revenue deployed · 81.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $29.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $217K · 19 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.