Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
461973968
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2023, Form 990-N 2013
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
7072007591
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Culture, and Humanities N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$622,187
Expenses
$653,018
Assets
$1,736,544
Liabilities
$63,956

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kate Ristau (President)
  • Anthony Eichenlaub (Vice President)
  • Jeffe Kennedy (President)
  • John Murphy (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Kate Baker (Executive Dir.): $118,527 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the organization is to promote, advance, and support science fiction and fantasy writing in the united states and elsewhere, by educating and informing the general public and supporting and empowering science fiction and fantasy writers.

What it reported doing in 2024

Advocacy and defenseAdvocacy and defense focus on advocating on behalf of writers, partnering for healthcare access and providing grants to workshops, conventions, and to cover emergency medical expenses, among other activities. These programs also defend genre writers and genre writing by championing copyrights, developing model contracts, and highlighting predatory practices.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 83% 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 most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 59
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.6%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 59.2%; rating input score 59
  • Fundraising efficiency: $22.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Limited
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 36.7%; rating input score 37; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.66; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.2%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.6% of revenue deployed · 59.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $387K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $119K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 32 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.