Citizens Commission on Human Rights of Austin

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742683124
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
5124289840
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$198,000
Expenses
$281,127
Assets
$469,375
Liabilities
$7,612

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JERRY BOSWELL (PRESIDENT & DIRECTOR)
  • LEE SPILLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LEE SPILLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $42,071 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The citizens commission on human rights of austin (cchr of austin) is a non-political, non-religious mental health industry watchdog whose mission is to eradicate abuses committed under the guise of mental health. We work to ensure patient and consumer protections are enacted.

What it reported doing in 2024

Program service accomplishments: public awarenessin 2024 cchr austin continued on a state level and nationally to educate the public about the dangers of psychiatric drugging, the need for increased warnings and greater avenues of informed consent. In addition it continued its statewide speaking tour, giving presentations in locations ranging from the Texas panhandle to the Texas coast, educating parents and parent groups on parental rights in school mental health. Cchr austin continued its children's crusade to educate parents and others on how to advocate for themselves on issues surrounding school mental health and parental consent. Many parents showed up to the capitol to relay their experiences with school mental health and social and emotional learning. Cchr austin continued to service allied groups, individuals, and attorneys, educating them on issues including consent, and the problem of patients being held against their will in psychiatric facilities.researching psychiatric abuseduring 2024, cchr austin responded to school mental health related complaints, as well as seeing a post-covid return of allegations from patients and loved ones that they were held against their will in psychiatric facilities. This led to a number of complaints being filed.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The program-spending lines do not add up, so the filing cannot show reliably whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.6%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 66.6%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.65 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -42%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.67; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -48.9% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -15.2% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.6% of revenue deployed · 66.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $187K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $42K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.