Chicago 2011 Transition Committee
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 275320022
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2012–2013
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2013
- Location
- Chicago, IL, USA
- Phone
- 3125059691
- Rating
- 43
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Government and Public Administration
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $6,737
- Expenses
- $6,737
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
People named in this filing
- DAVID SPIELFOGEL (DIRECTOR & TRANSITION DIRE)
- TOM O'BRIANT (DIRECTOR)
- SARAH PANG (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 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Chicago 2011 transition committee (the "committee") was organized to facilitate the transition to a new mayoral administration for the city of chicago. As evidenced by the presidential act of 1963, as amended, congress has recoginized the importance of promoting the orderly transfer of executive power to assure continuity in the conduct of government affairs and to minimize disruptions to government activities. The committee seeks to advance this important goal by engaging in activities critical to a successful, orderly transition that might otherwise present a financial burden to the city of chicago.
What it reported doing in 2013
No programs were conducted during 2013. The organization had minimal operating expenses during 2013 and was dissolved effective november 18, 2013.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 28
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
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: 0%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 164.1% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2012 to 2013
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.