Facing the Future

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911678158
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2066835384
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$352,899
Expenses
$463,993
Assets
$103,597
Liabilities
$19,446

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Thomas Buford (President)
  • Laura Skelton (Vice President and Secretary)
  • Jack Edgerton (Executive Director)
  • Kimberly Corrigan (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Jack Edgerton (Executive Director): $83,806 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Facing the Future creates tools for educators that equip and motivate students to develop critical thinking skills, build global awareness, and engage in positive solutions for a sustainable future.

What it reported doing in 2013

Facing the Future provides educators with the tools and resources they need to ignite their students' interest in complex global issues while helping them achieve academically. Our approach is positive and solutions-oriented, and our business model is systemic and leveraged; Facing the Future programming reaches hundreds of thousands of students each year at a cost of less than $2 per student. We provide curriculum resources on global issues and sustainable solutions, including student textbooks, teacher lesson plans and thematic units that contain both lessons and student readings. Facing the Future curriculum resources are being used in all 50 states and more than 140 countries. We also provide professional development and consulting for pre-service and in-service teachers, departments, school districts and states as well as action and service learning information and opportunities.

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 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 14
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 85.9%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -31.5%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.22; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.1%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -15.3% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -49.7% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 85.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $398K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $84K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 42 of 42 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2010 to 2013
  • 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.

  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 36/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.