University Preparation School at Csu Channel Islands

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
204734568
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Camarillo, CA, USA
Phone
8054824608
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Charter Schools

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,158,018
Expenses
$11,200,288
Assets
$6,800,600
Liabilities
$1,693,271

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHARMON EVANS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHARMON EVANS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $213,763 total reported compensation
  • VERONICA SOLORZANO (DIRECTOR, STUDENT SERVICES): $195,267 total reported compensation
  • ECHO REVES (DIRECTOR, CURRICULUM & INSTUCTION): $190,885 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Provide a collaborative community of innovative learners who seek out challenges and persevere toward individual and shared goals. We provide multiple opportunities for students to thrive in a diverse and compassionate learning environment.

What it reported doing in 2024

Operate the university preparation charter school, which: optimizes student potential and performance via instructional delivery by teachers who employ school wide collaboration and articulation to facilitate the implementation of the best and most promising research-based pedagogical practices; offers a setting in which classrooms reflect the ethnic, linguistic, socioeconomic and special-needs diversity of California classrooms; serves as a laboratory for theoretical and action research which will contribute to the body of knowledge regarding curriculum, instruction, assessment, child growth and development, parent/community participation and education, and site administration.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 98% 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 84.7%; rating input score 85
  • 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: 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.4%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.61; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85% of revenue deployed · 84.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $9.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $214K · 13 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $903K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.
  • Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.