Western Sierra Charter Schools

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263006883
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oakhurst, CA, USA
Phone
5596421422
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,060,677
Expenses
$9,124,666
Assets
$7,798,708
Liabilities
$1,317,111

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Michael Cox (Executive Dir.): $188,260 total reported compensation
  • Jody Jeffers (CBO): $166,471 total reported compensation
  • Nancy Garcia (Principal): $128,526 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Western Sierra Charter Schools, a charter management organization, currently manages three charter schools, Mountain Home School Charter, Glacier High School Charter, Endeavor Charter School. The mission of all Charters is the following: to inspire students to learn and grow to their potential and become responsible contributing community members; assist parents in the education of their students; and provide the community with a valid educational alternative.

What it reported doing in 2024

Mountain Home School Charter, Glacier High School Charter, and Endeavor Charter School will accomplish their mission to inspire students to learn and grow to their potential and become responsible contributing community members by the following: serving as a liaison between the community and the home schooling family; demonstrating to the community the educational soundness and viability of publicly funded, parent-directed education for students; providing a supportive, encouraging environment in which parents can receive high quality training opportunities, teaching resources, mentoring, opportunities for networking, and a structure to support their educational objectives; and providing students with learning resources and an environment for enrichment opportunities that encourage them to become self-motivated, competent, lifelong learners.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 97% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.5%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 90.9%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.7%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.85; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.8%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.9% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.5% of revenue deployed · 90.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $8.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $188K · 10 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.
  • Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.