Tiananmen Academy Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463081817
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Hayward, CA, USA
Phone
9259978660
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Social Science

Reported finances

Revenue
$27,812
Expenses
$40,628
Assets
$11,353
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • FENGCONGDE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • WANGTIANCHENG (DIRECTOR): $4,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Public charity providing education

What it reported doing in 2014

Charity providing education

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 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 the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -46.1%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.8%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $41K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $4K · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.