Sage-ing International

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
611545623
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2007
Location
Davis, CA, USA
Phone
5108586747
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Mental Health Association

Reported finances

Revenue
$144,837
Expenses
$125,547
Assets
$239,345
Liabilities
$12,151

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

People named in this filing

  • KATIE LIEBERMAN (CO-CHAIR)
  • BRIAN JONES (CO-CHAIR)
  • CINDY SIEMERS (TREASURER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Providing innovative community-building education and service opportunities, webinars, onsite courses, and conferences to enhance conscious aging and connection.

What it reported doing in 2024

Leadership training impact - during 2024, eight sage-ing leaders (csls) were certified after a year-long, hands-on internship that included one-on-one mentoring by trained mentors, 15 hours of workshop facilitation in their local communities or via the zoom platform that was recorded for feedback and coaching by their assigned mentor. Group supervision was provided on a monthly basis as well as individualized coaching when needed by the program faculty. Among those certified as csls, five are from the us, one from the uk, one from panama, and one from south africa. These eight join the 300 plus other csls in spreading sage-ing and conscious aging topics.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 67% 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 - 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: 41
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 42.2%; rating input score 42
  • Program expense ratio: 51.6%; rating input score 52
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 13.3%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.91; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.4% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 42.2% of revenue deployed · 51.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $65K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 42/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.
  • Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.