The Looking Glass Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
251885472
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2015, Form 990-EZ 2016, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Rating
40
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,616
Expenses
$49,785
Assets
$4,583
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Peter Ennis (President)
  • Lauri Fink (Vice President Secretary)

People named in this filing

  • Peter Ennis (President)
  • Lauri Fink (Vice President Secretary)
  • James Zern (Treasurer)

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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support community learning

What it reported doing in 2016

To support community learning and problem solving through consultation and applied research evaluation and project management to work with community collaboration

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 14
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 19.7%; rating input score 20
  • Program expense ratio: 4.6%; rating input score 5

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -328.6%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.09; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 33.3% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.8% per year; rating input score 0; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -22.6% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 19.7% of revenue deployed · 4.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2010 to 2016
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 20/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.