Spark

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
300305014
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2019–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2018, Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4152269259
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$118,752
Expenses
$178,091
Assets
$58,577
Liabilities
$2,130

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

People named in this filing

  • AMANDA BROCK (Executive Dir.)
  • CARLO DaVIA (BOARD CHAIR)
  • AMY HAMBLIN (MEMBER)

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 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Spark seeks to advance gender equality by engaging the next generation in accessible forms of philanthropy.

What it reported doing in 2019

Educating about gender equality and philanthropy: spark's programming was reduced in 2019 because in september 2019 spark formally began the process of winding up and dissolving as an independent nonprofit corporation. At the beginning of 2020, spark will join forces with global fund for women. However, while still carrying out programming in the first half of 2019, spark continued its mission of educating young people about gender equality and philanthropy. The most significant program during that period was "the future is female" kickoff event featuring madame gandhi, who spoke to spark members about the importance of equal gender representation in all walks of life, from music to politics.

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 96% 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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Sustainability: 14
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.4%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 51.6%; rating input score 52

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -50%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.33; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 61%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -8.1% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.4% of revenue deployed · 51.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $92K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.