No Bully

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264348341
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Lafayette, CA, USA
Phone
4152183439
Rating
52
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$108,905
Expenses
$365,720
Assets
$32,296
Liabilities
$841,232

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Nicholas Carlisle (Founder and Former CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Nicholas Carlisle (Founder and Former CEO): $15,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

No Bully is a San Francisco based non-profit organization that trains schools on how to leverage student empathy to stop bullying and cyberbullying. The non-punitive No Bully System has created bully-free campuses for over 270,000 students.

What it reported doing in 2020

Incorporated in 2009, No Bully began in San Francisco in 2003 as a collaborative of educators, psychologists and lawyers committed to preventing the current generation of students from enduring the bullying that they experienced when they were in school. The No Bully System is a step-by-step process and set of interventions to prevent and stop bullying in schools. It guides school leaders and staff through a series of interventions for responding to bullying and harassment, depending on the severity of the incident. When severe or persistent bullying occurs, teachers facilitate Solutions Teams, where the target's peer group and the bully come together to stop the bullying. The evidence-based approach leverages the empathy and kindness inherent in all of us. Independent studies of the No Bully System show that schools trained by No Bully remedy bullying in over 90% of cases and that this remained true at a three-month follow up. The No Bully System aligns well with Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS), Response to Interventions (RTI) and Restorative Justice. For schools that are using PBIS, No Bully Solution Team is a Tier 2 intervention, and the follow-up coaching fits as a Tier 3 intervention.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 24
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 6
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 20%; rating input score 20
  • Program expense ratio: 6%; rating input score 6
  • Fundraising efficiency: $385.31 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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: 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -235.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.09; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 26.05; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.1%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 20% of revenue deployed · 6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 1 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $22K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $15K · 2 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2013 to 2020
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 20/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 6/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.