Center for the Study of Democratic Inst

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
953619061
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2013, Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Woodland Hills, CA, USA
Phone
8183482925
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Printing, Publishing

Reported finances

Revenue
$82,198
Expenses
$94,167
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NATHAN GARDELS (CEO / CFO)

People named in this filing

  • NATHAN GARDELS (CEO / CFO)
  • LILLIAN KIMBELL (Secretary)
  • MICHAEL DOUGLASSTONEBRIDGE (DIRECTOR)

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 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization's mission is to foster thinking and discussion of world affairs through the publication of npq (new perspectives quarterly), a journal of social and political thought.

What it reported doing in 2019

Publication of npq (new perspectives quarterly)is a journal of social and political thought published by wiley & sons. It has 150 exclusive print editions and is mainly circulated through consortium arrangements (bundled with other like journals electronically) to 5,000 institutions. Individual articles are syndicated worldwide weekly to 20 newspapers through the global viewpoint network of tribune content agency (formerly the los angeles times syndicate).

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
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. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.5%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 71.1%; rating input score 71

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -14.6%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 46.2%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -14.6% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -12.9% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9.8% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.5% of revenue deployed · 71.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $67K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2014 to 2019
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.