Urban Dove Team Charter Schools
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 453661819
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Long Island City, NY, USA
- Phone
- 7187838232
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Education
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $17,621,658
- Expenses
- $19,132,931
- Assets
- $49,020,846
- Liabilities
- $45,415,836
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- MELISSA MORALES (SCHOOL LEADER): $145,124 total reported compensation
- CHRISTOPHER BARFIELD (SCHOOL LEADER): $144,673 total reported compensation
- VERONICA ROTH (SPECIAL EDUCATION TEACHER): $130,524 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Urban dove team charter schools delivers an innovative sports-based, health, and fitness-centered curriculum designed to develop students into healthy, successful adults who are economically, socially, and emotionally independent. Our educational model energizes, educates, and empowers young people within a safe and positive environment grounded in high expectations and shared responsibility. Udtcs serves overaged and under-credited students who face limited educational options and are in critical need of targeted academic support, structured engagement, and positive pathways to success. Urban dove team charter schools are in the four boroughs: midwood neighborhood in brooklyn, melrose neighborhood in the bronx, harlem neighborhood in manhattan and astoria neighborhood in queens.
What it reported doing in 2024
During the 2024-2025 academic year, urban dove team charter schools delivered sports-based youth development and academic curriculum programs to approximately 933 students. Through a comprehensive model of individualized instruction, social-emotional and team-based learning, and participation in membership teams, ud team created a safe, structured, and supportive learning environment that actively engaged and energized students. This integrated approach has proven effective in re-engaging over-age and under-credited youth, successfully positioning students on track toward graduation and preparing them for continued success beyond high school
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 94% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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
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 expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 78
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 33
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 86.8%; rating input score 87
- Program expense ratio: 81%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: $5.12 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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; 66th 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: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -8.6%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.56; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.93; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.7%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 13.1% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 24% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 86.8% of revenue deployed · 81% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $15.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $145K · 14 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $1.8M reported
- Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
- 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 21/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.