Fred Friendly Seminars Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
134011592
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2012
Forms available
Form 990 2012
Location
New York, NY, USA
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Television

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$370,756
Expenses
$406,112
Assets
$26,851
Liabilities
$11,838

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

To produce and distribute television programs through the public broadcasting system network and conduct public seminars using socratic dialogue format to educate the public on current social public policy economic scientific and ethical issues.

What it reported doing in 2012

A series of seminars to be presented to graduate students at colombia business school covering ethical conduct in professional and business affairs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 93% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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: 90
  • Accountability: 60
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9.5%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.07; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.44; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.7%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 39.5% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -67.8% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 6 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $279K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $72K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2010 to 2012
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.