The Calendaring & Scheduling Consortium

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200870121
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2015, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Troy, NY, USA
Phone
6178160041
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$40,651
Expenses
$32,483
Assets
$52,106
Liabilities
$2,756

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GERSHON JANSSEN (PRESIDENT -)

People named in this filing

  • RUTGER GEELEN (CHAIRMAN, DI)
  • RONALD TSE (VICE PRESIDE)
  • GERSHON JANSSEN (PRESIDENT -)

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

Promote calendaring & scheduling standards and technologies.

What it reported doing in 2024

Promote calendaring and scheduling to the information technology industry and the general public. Promote and support collaboration between consortium members to achieve and improme interoperability. Conducted interoperability testing events where vendors may bring candidate application and products and determine their degree of conformance and implementation of relevant calendaring and scheduling standards. Promote design and implementation of open calendaring and scheduling standards. Report to standard bodies on the accuracy and completeness of calendaring and scheduling standards as determined in open interoperable testing sequences. Organize and conduct technical committees, round tables and other consortium activities in pursuit of its goals.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 81.3%; rating input score 81

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.1%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.6; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -38.8% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -14.7% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.1% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65% of revenue deployed · 81.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $26K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 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.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.