Amplifier Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
471612420
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Cultural, Ethnic Awareness

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,201,303
Expenses
$1,109,627
Assets
$314,194
Liabilities
$52,531

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Cleo Barnett (Executive Dir.): $123,650 total reported compensation
  • Aaron Huey (Director): $113,900 total reported compensation
  • Isabella A Sisneros (COO): $89,634 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Amplifier Foundation is a non-profit organization whose mission is to amplify the most important movements of our time. Amplifier's goal is to flip artists into activists and observers into participants.

What it reported doing in 2024

Native Vote: In partnership with IllumiNative and Natives Vote, Amplifier created a nationwide public art and storytelling campaign to support Indigenous voter engagement during the 2024 election season. We commissioned Indigenous artists, produced culturally responsive educational tools, and provided communications support to grassroots organizations working in key states where Native communities face structural barriers to voting. The campaign distributed over 10,000 physical artworks, supported more than 25 community events, and reached millions through digital and public installations to elevate Native voices and protect voting rights.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 92% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.2%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 65%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.39 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.6%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 29.5%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60.2% of revenue deployed · 65% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $721K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $124K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 28/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.