Sixdegreesorg

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
464860176
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Fairfax, VA, USA
Phone
8188210893
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,692,407
Expenses
$1,700,639
Assets
$737,723
Liabilities
$12,746

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KEVIN BACON (PRESIDENT)
  • MARK ROBINSON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • STACY HUSTON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • STACY HUSTON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $126,100 total reported compensation
  • BRIGID ZUKNICK (DIRECTOR OF PROGRAMS & DEV): $103,950 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Sixdegrees supports impactful initiatives to sustain and enrich local communities. We develop partnerships and solutions working collaboratively with local leaders, residents, and celebrities on increasing youth empowerment, justice and equality, and improving a sustainable living environment. We listen to and prioritize the lived experiences of communities that are commonly underserved and under resourced.

What it reported doing in 2024

Degree shift represents our commitment to spearheading campaigns and activations that convene communities for collective positive impact. We utilize multiple catalysts to amplify the reach and impact of our shared causes. Always accessible to people of differing abilities, degree shift is a testament to our belief in the power of collaborative efforts to drive meaningful change. In 2024, this program facilitated groundbreaking collaborations between organizations across the country. By uniting our strengths, we're creating a ripple effect that extends far beyond individual actions, proving that together, we're truly stronger than the sum of our parts.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 71% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.4%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 84.5%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.19 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 23rd 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.5%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.43; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.5%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -10% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.3% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.4% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.4% of revenue deployed · 84.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $126K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 22 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 19 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.