National Novel Writing Month

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
651282653
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Berkeley, CA, USA
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Media, Communications Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,158,793
Expenses
$1,339,741
Assets
$643,285
Liabilities
$327,640

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • William Faulkner (Executive Director)
  • Kilby Blades (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • William Faulkner (Executive Director): $140,707 total reported compensation
  • David Beck (Technical Director): $127,375 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

National novel writing month believes in the transformational power of creativity. We provide the structure, community, and encouragement to help people find their voices, achieve creative goals, and build new worlds - on and off the page.

What it reported doing in 2022

328,292 writers participated throughout the year; 127,974 writers participated in our november national novel writing month event, with 25,746 completing their wordcount goals. 45,626 writers participated in our camp nanowrimo events in april and july, with 10,250 completingtheir word-count goals. We provided free program facilitation resources to 791 local volunteers in 671 worldwide regions, as well as 1,038 community spaces.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 58
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 75.8%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.7 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

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: Scored; rating input score 0
  • 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -15.6%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.48; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.51; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 75.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $141K · 6 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $298K reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
  • 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.