University Preparatory Charter School for Young Men

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
800257911
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2009
Location
Rochester, NY, USA
Phone
5856721280
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Charter Schools

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,605,357
Expenses
$9,818,136
Assets
$8,940,963
Liabilities
$1,466,137

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Dr Edward Yansen (Board President)
  • Dr Larry Ellison (2nd Vice President)
  • Denise Rainey (Vice President)
  • Walter Larkin Jr (Chief Executive Officer)

Highest reported compensation

  • Walter Larkin Jr (Chief Executive Officer): $214,250 total reported compensation
  • Latresha Fuller (Chief Academic Officer): $172,522 total reported compensation
  • Cam Lewis (Chief Operating Officer): $157,291 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 establish a single-sex education option in the City of Rochester with an engaging learning environment and informed practices that are effective for young men.

What it reported doing in 2024

Special Education: The School is open to all children and does not discriminate on the basis of ethnicity, national origin, gender, disability, or any other grounds that would be unlawful or deny the civil rights of any individual. In accordance with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and Section 504, and the Americans with Disabilities Act, the School provides a free and appropriate education, in the least restrictive environment, to students with disabilities. The primary service delivery for students with special needs is inclusion. For students requiring supplemental services, the School contracts with local individuals or agencies to provide the required services outlined in the student's Individual Education Plan or 504 Plan.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 88% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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.
  • 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.5%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 82.7%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: -14.1%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.91; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.8%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.5% of revenue deployed · 82.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $8.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $214K · 13 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.