Calyx Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272800937
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Brooklyn, NY, USA
Phone
2129661900
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,198,949
Expenses
$6,611,380
Assets
$9,326,220
Liabilities
$295,017

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Nicholas Merrill (President)
  • Ellen McDermott (Interim Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Nicholas Merrill (President): $255,672 total reported compensation
  • Eric Bortel (Engineering Director): $254,825 total reported compensation
  • Ellen McDermott (Interim Executive Director): $218,887 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Calyx Institute's purposes are 1) to develop the best practices standards for privacy, security and free speech in the telecommunications industry and on the Internet; and 2) Educating the general public and service providers on privacy, security and free speech practices.

What it reported doing in 2024

Education and research focused on studying, testing and developing and implementing privacy technology and tools to promote free speech, free expression, civic engagement and and privacy rights on the Internet and in the Mobile telephone industry.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 61% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 52% for direct work, and 48% for member benefits.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 51
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.4%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 78.6%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • 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: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.2%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.41; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.5%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 21.7% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 20% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 30.9% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.4% of revenue deployed · 78.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 2 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $256K · 9 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 41 of 42 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.