Thrive Academy Atlanta Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 844724382
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2023–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Atlanta, GA, USA
- Phone
- 4044220692
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Secondary, High School
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $921,198
- Expenses
- $627,199
- Assets
- $822,954
- Liabilities
- $135,139
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Stacy Hammond McEver (President)
Highest reported compensation
- Stacy Hammond McEver (President): $98,250 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Thrive Academy is a private Christian school using education as a platform to reach, disciple, and empower students facing systemic injustice, childhood trauma, and poverty. With student housing, engaging curriculum, and intentional staff-student relationships, students at Thrive are becoming thriving Christian leaders through education and experiencing the heart of God.
What it reported doing in 2024
Educational Service Program Expenses - These expenses include the following Salaries and Wages - The Director is paid a salary and outside contractors are brought in each day to teach classes during the week. Rent/Utility/Occupancy - monthly rent paid for the use of the school property and utilities cost Food expense-Thrive Academy contracts with a food service that feeds the students breakfast and lunch Transportation - Thrive pays a contractor to pick up and take home students each day from school. Office Expenses office expenses include school supplies, computer and Coppier costs, and cleaning supplies. 27 Students were enrolled in the school this year. There was a mix of new and returning students 4 new students received Dystexia diagnosis and made remarkable progress in reading Thrive Academy follows the Georgia Education Requirements and the students received instruction in Math-English-Science-Social Studies -Physical Education and Bible Students participated in weekly trauma groups and progressed in their emotional wellness and health Thrive Academy had a baseball team for the first time this year and competed in a local FCA league which is also a non-profit.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 71
- Transparency & Controls: 83
- Accountability: 58
- Sustainability: 62
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 60.1%; rating input score 60
- Program expense ratio: 88.3%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: $54.71 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 4th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 31.9%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.31; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 15.7%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 70.5% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 60.1% of revenue deployed · 88.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 0 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $556K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $98K · 4 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $226K reported
- Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 7 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.