Institute for Next Generations

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
822751572
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
2137181512
Rating
23
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$368,942
Expenses
$382,710
Assets
$103,582
Liabilities
$123,000

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • IN KYU LEE (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • IN KYU LEE (PRESIDENT)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Promote christian faith and leadership

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

REVIEW - Revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 8
  • Transparency & Controls: 50
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 8.5%; rating input score 9
  • Program expense ratio: 8.2%; rating input score 8
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.7%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.27; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.19; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 30.6% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 51.9% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 8.5% of revenue deployed · 8.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 1 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $383K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 9/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.