Thayer Academy
Legal name: Trustees of Thayer Academy Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 042105781
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Aug 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Braintree, MA, United States
- Phone
- 781.843.3580
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Secondary, High School
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $56,853,378
- Expenses
- $55,855,874
- Assets
- $190,210,815
- Liabilities
- $78,641,168
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
30 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- CHRISTOPHER FORTUNATO (HEAD OF SCHOOL): $863,455 total reported compensation
- MELISSA L FORGER (DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT): $411,213 total reported compensation
- JED WARTMAN (ASSISTANT HEAD OF SCHOOL): $352,596 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
College preparatory educational institution for grades 5 through 12. Affinity and alliance groups support connection, identity, and belonging within a diverse community. Traditionally, affinity groups bring together individuals who share a specific identity, while alliance groups welcome those who wish to support and learn alongside others. These groups foster understanding, empathy, and community through dialogue and collaboration. At Thayer, all students are welcome to join, listen, and grow together through these inclusive spaces. The list below includes many of our most active groups, but there is always space for new groups to emerge, and others are created or operate on an annual basis. Upper School Affinity & Alliance Groups.
What it reported doing in 2024
Summer programs offered to all students to further enhance the school's mission on a broader front (ie arts, crafts, sports, and other specialized programs).
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 88% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 75
- Transparency & Controls: 85
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 49
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 83.7%; rating input score 84
- Program expense ratio: 83.1%; rating input score 83
- Fundraising efficiency: $2.28 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 95%; rating input score 95; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 1.8%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.41; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.41; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.1%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
- Where the money goes: 83.7% of revenue deployed · 83.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $46.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $863K · 30 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.1M reported
- Consistency: 38 of 39 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 7/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.