San Francisco-cork Sister City Committee

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942953298
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public, Society Benefit N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$1
Expenses
$3,277
Assets
$6,563

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATHLEEN MANNING (President)

People named in this filing

  • JAMES HERLIHY (Treasurer)
  • KATHLEEN MANNING (President)
  • TERESA PHILPOTT SEQUEIRA (Secretary)

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

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

Overview

Mission

The san francisco-cork sister city committee was founded in 1984 and pursuant to an agreement between the mayor of san francisco and the lord mayor of cork, ireland, both cities agreed to committee funding projects which would increase employment and economic development in cork; to exchange information involving the ports in the respective cities; to encourage tourism between both cities; to exchange medical professionals and academics between both cities and; to support arts, culture and recreation.to accomplish the terms of that understanding, this reporting organization restricts its disbursement to only such organization in cork which increase employment, arts, economics, etc. As set forth in the agreement. Individuals receiving disbursements qualify only if they are involved in the activities as set forth in the agreement

What it reported doing in 2024

See schedule o

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -327,600%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.2% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -21.7% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.6% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.