Cmc Initiative Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 461052114
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2018, Form 990-N 2012
- Location
- Atlanta, GA, USA
- Phone
- 7704108301
- Rating
- 68
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alcohol, Drug Abuse, Prevention Only
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $338,459
- Expenses
- $279,542
- Assets
- $115,955
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Eric Odom (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Eric Odom (Executive Director): $91,046 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Cmc initiative's goal is to provide an alternative to the downtown college drinking scene and to decrease the number of students trapped in alcohol and drug abuse on college campuses by providing alcohol and drug free events on a regular basis
What it reported doing in 2024
Core events: our core events are alcohol and drug-free, occurring 10-20 times each fall and spring college semester. Attendance typically ranges from 50-750 students. The goal of the core event is to foster alcohol and drug prevention initiatives across our 5 college campuses.our mission revolves around cultivating positive, health conscious environments while nurturing a strong sense of community among college students. Our impact is tangible: attendees find themselves elevating their personal standards after experiencing our events firsthand. Notably, freshmen and other students gain clarity on their choices, realizing they have the option to abstain from the pressures of college party culture. In our environment, peer pressure dissipates, leaving no room for regret and offering a refreshing alternative to the typical college social scene
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 52
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 65
- Sustainability: 50
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 48.7%; rating input score 49
- Program expense ratio: 59%; rating input score 59
- Fundraising efficiency: $14.24 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th 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: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 18th 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: 17.4%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.41; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 32.6%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -4.4% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 48.7% of revenue deployed · 59% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $165K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $91K · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2013 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 49/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.