Walk San Francisco
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 943334679
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2013–2020
- Forms available
- Form 990 2016, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2010
- Location
- San Francisco, CA, USA
- Phone
- 4154319255
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Civil Rights
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,572
- Expenses
- $176,345
- Assets
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Zoee Astrachan (President)
- Jessica Lum (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Megan Gee (Secretary)
- Sergio Ruiz (Board Member)
- Ajita Choksi (Board 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 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Walk SF makes walking in San Francisco safe for everyone, so our community is healthier and more livable. We seek to improve San Franciscos walking environment through community organizing and policy advocacy that educates residents, city agencies, and elected officials regarding the need for more pedestrian-friendly streets.
What it reported doing in 2020
In June 2021, Walk San Francisco completed its dissolution, with certifications by the Attorney General and California Secretary of State to transfer all remaining assets to Walk San Francisco Foundation. This one-time transaction dissolution transfer was made on 6/25/21 in the amount of $171,957.
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 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 99
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 8
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 97.5%; rating input score 98
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -11,117.9%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -29.6% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -6.6% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $172K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
- Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2013 to 2020
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.