Windsor Charter Academy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841517346
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2011
Location
Windsor, CO, US
Phone
(970) 674-5020
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Charter Schools

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$24,751,804
Expenses
$21,348,536
Assets
$55,958,244
Liabilities
$52,086,637

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sherry Bartmann (President)
  • Elaine Hungenberg (Vice President)
  • Rebecaa Teeples (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Rebecaa Teeples (Executive Director): $229,809 total reported compensation
  • SarahGennie Colazio (Director of Finance): $186,293 total reported compensation
  • Hannah Mancina (Director of HS Education): $162,927 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Windsor Charter Academy is a Core Knowledge school focused on academic excellence, 21st century skills, and educating the whole child.

What it reported doing in 2024

Windsor Charter Academy provides a challenging academic program based on Core Knowledge curriculum that promotes academic excellence character development and enthusiasm for lifelong learning. The mission of the school is to develop in each child the love of learning the ability to engage in critical thinking and to demonstrate mastery of the academic building blocks necessary for a successful future.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 91% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 60.6%; rating input score 61
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.7%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.62; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.93; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.6%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.6% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 53% of revenue deployed · 60.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $12.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $230K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 43 of 43 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.