Georgia Center for Opportunity Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 581928520
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Peachtree Corners, GA, USA
- Phone
- 7702420001
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Education N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,189,985
- Expenses
- $3,665,937
- Assets
- $1,255,887
- Liabilities
- $170,135
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RANDALL HICKS (CEO)
- ERIC COCHLING (Vice President)
- JAMES ECKSTEIN (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- RANDALL HICKS (CEO): $173,292 total reported compensation
- ERIC COCHLING (Vice President): $166,158 total reported compensation
- JAMES ECKSTEIN (Vice President): $154,642 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Georgia Center for Opportunity GCO is an independent, non-partisan think tank dedicated to increasing opportunity and improving the quality of life for all Georgians.
What it reported doing in 2024
-family formation: the belief through our experience & research that people from all walks of life are more likely to flourish if they have an intact, healthy family & strong relationships. -employment: our goal is to help individuals flourish through productive work, which leads to dignity, a sense of purpose and self-sufficiency. -education: we are committed to empowering parents with school choice options, strengthening community partners who directly work with student to remain in school and prepare for college or a career.
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 94% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 84
- Transparency & Controls: 75
- Accountability: 85
- Sustainability: 42
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 80.5%; rating input score 80
- Program expense ratio: 91.9%; rating input score 92
- Fundraising efficiency: $72.98 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 15th 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 12.5%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.34; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 30.2%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 80.5% of revenue deployed · 91.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 11 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $173K · 16 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $102K reported
- Consistency: 38 of 38 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 3 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.