Center for Scientific Creation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 363204436
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2017
- Forms available
- Form 990 2017
- Location
- Phoenix, AZ, USA
- Phone
- 6029557663
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- General Science
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $49,684
- Expenses
- $119,026
- Assets
- $90,433
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DR WALTER T BROWN (Director & President)
Highest reported compensation
- DR WALTER T BROWN (Director & President): $50,417 total reported compensation
- MARGARET H BROWN (Secretary & Treasurer): $32,083 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Education of scientific creation
What it reported doing in 2017
Book sales from the eighth edition of book discussing evidence relating to the creation and the flood
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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. The required major-donor schedule is missing or incomplete and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 73
- Accountability: 72
- Sustainability: 22
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 88%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -139.6%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.76; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 69.3%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 88% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $105K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $50K · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules · includes major donors
- 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 — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.