Computer Science Teachers Association Llc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 270115816
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Phone
- 8722212771
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Adult, Continuing Education
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $9,951,207
- Expenses
- $10,022,521
- Assets
- $9,388,250
- Liabilities
- $3,562,506
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
18 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JAKE BASKIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- JAKE BASKIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $407,667 total reported compensation
- BRYAN J TWAREK (HEAD, RESEARCH AND INNOVATION): $183,175 total reported compensation
- MICHELLE BURTON (DIRECTOR, PROGRAM OPERATIONS): $180,076 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Csta is focused on: - creating a thriving community that fosters continuous growth, belonging, and connection among cs educators. - equipping educators with the cs teaching and learning resources they need to elevate their practice. - deepening and expanding leadership for cs educators. - advocating for our vision and mission at the local, state, and national levels.- collaborating to realize our vision.
What it reported doing in 2024
Csta provides professional development opportunities and services to its 10,000 members in over 120 countries. Csta's membership consist of computer science educators, higher education instructors, interested parties from school districts, colleges and universities, as well as other organizations and supporters in the computer science, technology and education industries.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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 most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 82
- Transparency & Controls: 56
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 31
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 84.9%; rating input score 85
- Program expense ratio: 83.9%; rating input score 84
- Fundraising efficiency: $24.85 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 12.5%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -0.7%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.94; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.8%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 28% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 24.4% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 22.8% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 84.9% of revenue deployed · 83.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $8.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $408K · 18 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 5 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 12/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.