Tree of Life International Charter School

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
820951127
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Anderson, CA, USA
Phone
5303787040
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Charter Schools

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,916,459
Expenses
$5,957,964
Assets
$12,248,705
Liabilities
$4,710,300

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WYNDI NELSON (PRESIDENT)
  • DEBORAH WALLACE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DEBORAH WALLACE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $172,560 total reported compensation
  • DONNA HELLER (CHIEF BUSINESS OFFICIAL): $101,700 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Empowering students to become bold, compassionate leaders who embrace and champion the value of all cultures.

What it reported doing in 2024

The tree of life international charter school (tlcs) is a dual immersion tk-8th grade public charter school where love is our first language. All students become bilingual and biliterate in the dual immersion model where they begin in tk or kinder with 90% of the instruction in spanish and gradually add more english each year up through grade 8. About 1/3 of our students are native spanish and 2/3 are native english speakers. Besides core instruction, tk-4th grade students participate in pe, music, art, technology, dance and 3rd language exploration class such as french or sign language. 5th-8th graders choose from a number of 3rd language, visual and performing arts or cte electives.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 96% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 78.5%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • 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: 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 33.2%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.06; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.6%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 21.9% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 25.8% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 43.3% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53% of revenue deployed · 78.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $173K · 7 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $1.9M reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.