Long history of IRS 990 filings demonstrates transparency
Spending Breakdown
How Johnson Oconnor Research Support Corporation allocates its funds across programs, administration, and fundraising.
80%
Program Spending
Healthy — majority goes to mission
15%
Admin Costs
Reasonable — admin costs in check
5%
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 Johnson Oconnor Research Support Corporation
Is Johnson Oconnor Research Support Corporation a legitimate charity?
Based on AI analysis of IRS 990 filings, Johnson Oconnor Research Support Corporation (EIN: 133970491) appears trustworthy. Mission Score: 70/100. 2 red flags identified, 3 strengths noted.
Is Johnson Oconnor Research Support Corporation a good charity to donate to?
Johnson Oconnor Research Support Corporation has a Mission Score of 70/100. Revenue: $1.7M. Assets: $18.8M. Review the full transparency report for detailed spending breakdown and executive compensation analysis.
What is the EIN for Johnson Oconnor Research Support Corporation?
The Employer Identification Number (EIN) for Johnson Oconnor Research Support Corporation is 133970491. 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 Johnson Oconnor Research Support Corporation spend its money?
Johnson Oconnor Research Support Corporation allocates 80% to programs, 15% to administration, and 5% to fundraising. Healthy nonprofits typically spend 75%+ on programs.
How can I verify Johnson Oconnor Research Support Corporation's tax-exempt status?
You can verify Johnson Oconnor Research Support Corporation's tax-exempt status using EIN 133970491 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
Johnson Oconnor Research Support Corporation demonstrates a consistent financial position with substantial assets, averaging over $19 million in recent years. However, the organization has frequently operated at a deficit, with expenses exceeding revenue in 7 out of the last 10 reported periods. For example, in 2023, expenses were $1,466,570 against revenues of $551,783, indicating a significant reliance on existing assets or prior year surpluses to cover operational costs. This trend suggests a need for closer examination of revenue generation strategies or expense management.
The organization's spending efficiency is difficult to fully assess without a detailed breakdown of program, administrative, and fundraising expenses from the provided data. However, the consistent operational deficits raise questions about the long-term sustainability of its current spending patterns relative to its incoming revenue. The absence of reported officer compensation across all filings indicates a potential strength in minimizing overhead related to executive pay, or that compensation is structured in a way not captured by this specific metric.
Transparency appears to be a strong point, given the consistent filing of IRS Form 990s over 13 periods, providing a long history of financial data. The lack of reported officer compensation also contributes to a perception of fiscal prudence in leadership. However, without more granular expense data, a complete picture of spending efficiency and program impact remains somewhat obscured. The organization's substantial asset base provides a buffer, but the recurring deficits warrant attention.