Philanthropy U Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810956313
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020, Form 990-N 2015
Location
San Mateo, CA, USA
Phone
5108796546
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,163,051
Expenses
$4,674,698
Assets
$414,467
Liabilities
$222,484

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PHILIP CLARK (DIRECTOR, CEO (THRU 08/20))
  • CONNOR DIEMAND-YAUMAN (DIRECTOR, CEO (THRU 05/20))
  • NIKHIL SINHA (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • PHILIP CLARK (DIRECTOR, CEO (THRU 08/20)): $252,591 total reported compensation
  • CATHY HUANG (VP OF PRODUCT): $176,696 total reported compensation
  • CONNOR DIEMAND-YAUMAN (DIRECTOR, CEO (THRU 05/20)): $160,529 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

With a mission to transform the capacity of 5,000 local civil society organizations by 2020, philanthropy university provides local leaders with the knowledge, resources and support they needed to better serve their communities and grow their impact.

What it reported doing in 2020

Philanthropy university is an innovative tech-enabled platform that transforms the impact of local organizations working to deliver sustainable development for all. Its goal is to strengthen the capacity of 5,000 organizations and improve the lives of 100 million people by 2020. Philanthropy university's three initiatives provide the knowledge, resources and support local organizations need to enable meaningful, measurable and lasting change. Optimized for the global south and open to all, the university accelerates local impact with world-class free online courses and vibrant online communities. Its awards initiative recognizes local impact, celebrating the most promising learners and building organizational resilience with access to capital. And the philanthropy university forums inspire local impact at events that mobilizes greater locally-led development cooperation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 5
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 77.3%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.11 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 16th 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: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • 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: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -47.8%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.09; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.54; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.1%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -14.6% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 77.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $253K · 15 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $918K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2016 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 24/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.