Equal Rights Wa Education Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201205882
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2012, Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2063242570
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Civil Rights

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$61,385
Expenses
$85,943
Assets
$8,478
Liabilities
$7,535

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

People named in this filing

  • JOSH CASTLE (DIRECTOR)
  • TRACY FLYNN (DIRECTOR)
  • MONISHA HARRELL (CHAIR)

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 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To end discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in Washington state. The education fund, a nonprofit organization, seeks to do so by facilitating and coordinating the efforts of the lgbt and allied community that are directed to research, education, and community mobilization.

What it reported doing in 2013

- public education on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender issues at festivals throughout Washington state, via website, email, facebook and twitter. - training interns from state colleges and university on non-profit administration, social outreach, event planning and staffing. - volunteer coordination. - bringing in guest speakers - promoting safe schools and anti-bullying - annual community breakfast - meeting with community leaders from allied organizations

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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.8%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 56.3%; rating input score 56

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: -40%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.1; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.89; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -56.6% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -40.7% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.8% of revenue deployed · 56.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $48K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.