Charlotte Area Technology Collaborative

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
814762853
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2018
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Charlotte, NC, USA
Phone
7049211628
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$68,822
Expenses
$77,265
Assets
$75,733
Liabilities
$14,500

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • FRANK BONCIMINO (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KAY READ (ASST SEC/TREAS & EXEC DIRE)
  • LONNIE EMARD (DIRECTOR)
  • THERESA WILSON (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 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Unite & empower the community to grow an inclusive technology talent pipeline.

What it reported doing in 2018

Women in it ("wise") - wise is a program for women and men connecting and engaging the charlotte region - promoting opportunity, creating visibility and encouraging interest in technology careers for girls and advancing women in the technology profession. The program is designed to: (1) grow and support women in the technology pipeline through events and new activities to leverage a formal network of executives to progress women into new positions and (2) through outreach, encourage and support young women in pursuit of technology careers. Quarterly informational events, monthly networking and k16 outreach programs including: ncwit affiliate aspirations program, wise scholarship, ncwit and acm-w charlotte region and wise quarterly programming.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 58% for direct work, and 42% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 50.7%; rating input score 51
  • Program expense ratio: 45.2%; rating input score 45

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -12.3%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.98; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 55.9%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 52% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.7% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 31.9% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 50.7% of revenue deployed · 45.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 7 filed program accomplishments · $35K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2016 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 51/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.