Rise at Work

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
814680626
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
6195317473
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Reported finances

Revenue
$90,816
Expenses
$283,774
Assets
$28,621
Liabilities
$1,099

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DWAYNE CRENSHAW (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • DWAYNE CRENSHAW (President & CEO): $9,550 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide high-quality capacity building training, technical assistance, and education services to organizations of all types and sizes on issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion and the meaningful practice of inclusive leadership.

What it reported doing in 2018

Leadership diversity, dquity, and inclusion - It has become increasingly difficult for nonprofit organizations to become sustainable. In response, there is an emerging movement of nonprofit organizations developing social enterprises that hit the double bottom-line of generating sufficient revenue to cover 100% of the ventures cost, while also providing a source of sustainable funding to meet all or a significant portion of the nonprofits organizational and programmatic expenses necessary to achieve their mission and do social good. RISE@Work is intended to be such a social enterprise building off the existing strengths of its parent nonprofit organization, RISE San Diego (RISE), leverage RISEs goodwill and strategically maximize use of RISE resources. In 2017, general programming was focused on the research and development of RISE@Work. Significant amounts of existing staff time and additional consultant support was deployed to help conduct research and development of the RISE@Work social enterprise idea. The business model was thoroughly vetted to validate the assumptions made on market demand, target customer and best sale contact, messaging, pricing, curriculum design, beta testing, intellectual property issues, staffing trainings expense and revenue projections and determination of the right corporate structure (i.e. a program within RISE, a new sister nonprofit or for-profit entity).

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 80% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 21
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 82.5%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.5 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -212.5%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.1; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.8%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 110.4% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -112.6% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -154.7% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 82.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $234K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $10K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2017 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 19/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.