Citizen Generation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
455584043
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2013, Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
5126948538
Rating
44
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$50,682
Expenses
$132,480
Assets
$2,240
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Alex Winkelman (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Ben Kogut (Chairman)
  • Jenny Young (Vice Chairman)
  • Joe Ross (Treasurer)

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 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of Citizen Generation is to promote philanthropy and to create the habit of giving.

What it reported doing in 2014

Citizen Generation promotes philanthropy and creates the habit of giving through many innovative and creative ways. With the use of branding, marketing, and campaigns, Citizen Generation continues to build an audience centered on philanthropy. Citizen Generation also utilizes experiences as a mode of promoting philanthropy and creating the habit of giving by producing fundraisers, volunteer days, tours of nonprofits, and other unique gathers. In addition, Citizen Generation provides consulting services to other 501c3 organizations, community leaders, and businesses on how to involve themselves and the next generation in philanthropy.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

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: 26
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 33.6%; rating input score 34
  • Program expense ratio: 12.8%; rating input score 13

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -161.4%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.02; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.3%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -160.9% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -189.9% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 33.6% of revenue deployed · 12.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $17K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 34/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.