City of Briarcliff Initiative Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
462825439
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2014
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Coalitions

Reported finances

Revenue
$460
Expenses
$3,502
Assets
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALAN VENET (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ALAN VENET (PRESIDENT)
  • HERMAN LORENZ (SECRETARY)
  • CHARLES D WILLIAMS (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

Purpose - to investigate and study the feasibility of forming a city in unincorporated central dekalb county, Georgia; to develop a proposed city map; to conduct fundraising activities primarily for the purpose of engaging a professional organization to perform a feasibility study; to hold public information and fundraising meetings; to work with the Georgia legislature to pass legislation granting a local referendum; to advocate in favor of any city map approved by the corporation's board of directors.

What it reported doing in 2014

Acheivements during 2014 - continued to work towards legislative support for a cityhood bill; however, a citihood bill was not proposed during the legislative session. Sponsored neighborhood education meetings, and recruited volunteers to build community support, in early january 2015, cobi merged with another 501(c)(4) organization with a similar mission ( lakesideyes), and contributed remaining cash of 1,686 to the organization. During 2015, the name of lakesideyes was legally changed to city of lavista hills, yes

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 8
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 69.6%; rating input score 70

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -661.3%; rating input score 2; 2nd 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: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 69.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.