Coalition to Reduce Spending

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454429113
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2018
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Alexandria, VA, USA
Phone
2025036551
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$30,233
Expenses
$24,385
Assets
$14,868
Liabilities
$925

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JONATHAN BYDLAK (PRESIDENT/TR)

People named in this filing

  • JONATHAN BYDLAK (PRESIDENT/TR)
  • RICHARD LORENC (DIRECTOR)
  • KEVIN O'BOYLE (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 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Research, develop, and advocate for reduced federal spending and balanced budgets

What it reported doing in 2018

Issue advocacy & coalition building we built relationships with key influencers in the fiscal policy community; expanded website and social media presence to increase the coalition's authority on fiscal issues; provided educational resources, unique analyses, and proposed solutions for addressing those issues to coalition followers, policymakers, like-minded organizations, and members of the general public; and published editorials, blog posts, social media updates, and other commentaries promoting sound policies for reducing federal spending and balancing the federal budget.

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. 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: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 45.8%; rating input score 46
  • Program expense ratio: 56.8%; rating input score 57

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: 19.3%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.61; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.1%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11.9% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -24.3% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -47.4% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 45.8% of revenue deployed · 56.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $14K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2013 to 2018
  • 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.

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 46/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.