Participatory Culture Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
202630593
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022, Form 990-T 2022
Location
Boston, MA, USA
Phone
3476877525
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Computer Science

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,420,885
Expenses
$1,849,193
Assets
$887,241
Liabilities
$718,825

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • David Glassco (President)
  • Dean Jansen (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Aleli Alcala (Chief Sustainability Officer): $173,491 total reported compensation
  • Dean Jansen (CEO): $62,238 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To build tools and services that give people more ways to engage in their culture.

What it reported doing in 2022

Amara is a collaborative toolset and community for volunteers and organizations around the world to make almost any web video accessible for the deaf and to translate videos for all of us.All other programs are to provide a more open and diverse world of online videos through open source software and open internet protocols, and to help create a medium where the general public can create and publish media that will facilitate free expression of ideas and opinions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 81
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 78.6%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -30.1%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.48; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.81; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.7%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 78.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 6 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $173K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.