Marin County Grassroots Leadership Netwo

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680404997
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
San Rafael, CA, USA
Phone
4154914366
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Leadership Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$319,609
Expenses
$373,496
Assets
$243,659
Liabilities
$227,729

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Nancy Johnson (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • John Young (Executive Dir.): $66,011 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Marin County Grassroots Leadership network works to advance social equity and strengthen the voice of underrepresented communities in public policy decision-making to reduce poverty and improve the quality of life for all.

What it reported doing in 2014

Marin Grassroots Leadership Network has been working to advance equity and strengthen the voices of underrepresented communities through public policy initiatives in Marin County. Through various programs, Grassroots has made great strides in achieving its goals in 2014. Grassroots continued to partner with over 180 local, state, and national social justice groups to ensure that Marin remains at the forefront of the social equity movement and communicated their social equity agenda through new and traditional media outlets. Grassroots also provided leadership development capacity-building opportunities for 30 community residents and engaged over 600 residents from underrepresented communities of Marin in non-partisan voter education activities. Sponsored the 4th Annual Be The Dream Awards Celebration to honor leaders in government and businesses that demonstrated an eagerness to address equity through employment practices and services. Since it's development over four years ago, this event has attracted over 1,000 community leaders. Grassroots also continued the Equal Voice Leadership Academy, designed to enhance the skills of emerging community leaders. This program has graduated 225 minority residents over the past 11 years. Finally, Grassroots was active in creating programs and activities that would provide fairer housing and better access to transportation to the underserved in Marin County. These program efforts allowed for 123 low-income residents to have their voices heard through community forums and public meetings. Through its many varied programs, Grassroots has continued to make significant strides towards promoting equitable communities through public policy, civic engagement, and leadership development.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 61.6%; rating input score 62
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 10th 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: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -16.9%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.65; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.93; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.7%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -30.7% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -30.3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 93.4% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72% of revenue deployed · 61.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $230K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $66K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2013 to 2014
  • 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.