Quick charity verification for Civitan International (EIN: 208441302)
Verdict: Civitan International shows mixed signals
65/100Mission Score
$0Revenue
$0Assets
2Red Flags
2Strengths
Red Flags
Outdated financial data (latest filing from 2011)
No recent revenue or asset information available
Strengths
No reported liabilities in 2011
Positive net assets in 2011 ($9,024)
Spending Breakdown
How Civitan International allocates its funds across programs, administration, and fundraising.
75%
Program Spending
Healthy — majority goes to mission
15%
Admin Costs
Reasonable — admin costs in check
10%
Fundraising
Within typical range
How to read this: Well-run charities typically spend 75% or more on programs, keep admin under 25%, and fundraising under 15%. A high program ratio means more of every dollar goes directly to the mission.
How to Interpret This Report
What Red Flags Mean
Red flags are potential warning signs identified by AI analysis of IRS 990 filings. They may indicate issues like declining revenue, high executive pay relative to program spending, lack of transparency, or governance concerns. A single red flag does not necessarily mean an organization is untrustworthy, but multiple flags warrant further investigation before donating.
What Mission Score Measures
The Mission Score (0-100) evaluates how effectively a nonprofit fulfills its stated purpose. It combines multiple factors: program spending efficiency (how much goes to programs vs. overhead), financial health and sustainability, governance quality, transparency in reporting, and consistency of operations over time. A score of 70+ indicates strong alignment with the organization’s mission.
Using This Data for Donation Decisions
Use this report as one input in your decision. Look at the overall Mission Score for a quick assessment, review red flags and strengths for specific concerns, check the spending breakdown to see where money goes, and compare executive compensation to the organization’s size. Consider viewing the full transparency report for deeper analysis, and always verify tax-exempt status with the IRS before making large donations.
Frequently Asked Questions about Civitan International
Is Civitan International a legitimate charity?
Based on AI analysis of IRS 990 filings, Civitan International (EIN: 208441302) shows mixed signals. Mission Score: 65/100. 2 red flags identified, 2 strengths noted.
Is Civitan International a good charity to donate to?
Civitan International has a Mission Score of 65/100. Revenue: $0. Assets: $0. Review the full transparency report for detailed spending breakdown and executive compensation analysis.
What is the EIN for Civitan International?
The Employer Identification Number (EIN) for Civitan International is 208441302. This is the unique tax ID assigned by the IRS.
What is a Mission Score?
The Mission Score is a 0-100 rating that measures how effectively a nonprofit fulfills its stated mission. It factors in program spending efficiency, financial transparency, governance practices, and outcome reporting. Scores above 70 indicate strong mission alignment, 40-69 suggest mixed performance, and below 40 signals potential concerns.
How does Civitan International spend its money?
Civitan International allocates 75% to programs, 15% to administration, and 10% to fundraising. Healthy nonprofits typically spend 75%+ on programs.
How can I verify Civitan International's tax-exempt status?
You can verify Civitan International's tax-exempt status using EIN 208441302 on the IRS Tax Exempt Organization Search (TEOS) at apps.irs.gov/app/eos. You can also request copies of their Form 990 directly from the organization, as they are required by law to provide them upon request.
AI Transparency Report
Civitan International, based on its single available 2011 filing, appears to be a very small organization with limited financial activity. In 2011, it reported $46,307 in revenue and $40,238 in expenses, resulting in a modest surplus. Its assets were $9,024 with no reported liabilities, indicating a stable but minimal financial position. The organization's transparency is somewhat limited by the age and scarcity of data; only one filing from 2011 is available, and more recent information would be necessary for a comprehensive assessment. The lack of reported officer compensation in 2011 suggests either a volunteer-led structure or that compensation fell below reporting thresholds, which is common for very small nonprofits.