Falling Whistles

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263069105
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2012
Forms available
Form 990 2012
Location
Burbank, CA, USA
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
International Human Rights

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$254,596
Expenses
$687,885
Assets
$46,695
Liabilities
$317,908

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Falling whistles is a campaign for peace in congo.

What it reported doing in 2012

Educating consumers in the west about our role in perpetuating cycles of violence in congo; disseminating tools through short films, retail partnerships, and other forms of media; gathering activists around these tools through speaking tours, whistler societies, campus clubs, and community events; engaging activists in advocacy towards constructive solutions; and partnering with congolese leaders in north and south kivu provinces to rebuild communities affected by war.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 38
  • Sustainability: 4
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -170.2%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.07; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 6.81; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.7%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 2 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $577K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $44K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.