Center for Digital Archaeology

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
275391433
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2015, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
San Rafael, CA, USA
Phone
4153263243
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Humanities Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$0
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Ruth Tringham (President)

People named in this filing

  • Ruth Tringham (President)
  • Margaret Conkey (Secretary)
  • Cinzia Perlingeri (Executive Dir.)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The center for digital archaeology (coda) aims to empower archaeologists, technologists and educators by driving the adoption and development of digital heritage solutions, emphasizing the practical, the doable, and the achievable for practioners of our field with as little reliance on technology specialists as possible.

What it reported doing in 2017

We work with archaeologists to go paperless and adopt tools to workflows that save time, paper, and money in the field and in post-processing. We do this by using Codifi, an archaeological data and media management solution that integrates data and media generated by excavation and survey into one digital database. Codifi was developed as a collaboration between CoDA and Codifi, Inc. in more than three years of development led by Chief Technology Officer Michael Ashley, with a team of five high level professional developers, data architects, and UI designers. After two years of testing by over 40 professional archaeologists, in 6 different projects, over 18 field seasons, Codifi is now ready to help all archaeology professionals. Codifi replaces and augments paper based recording and rapidly accelerates data entry while providing a solid born-archival workflow for documents, images, video and geo-spatial information.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: NotEnoughData
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: Limited
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: Limited
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -22.6% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -29.6% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 1 of 1 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2016 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.