Black Cultural Zone Community Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
843885205
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oakland, CA, USA
Phone
5104700183
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$20,142,008
Expenses
$9,100,366
Assets
$26,217,079
Liabilities
$5,667,169

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CAROLYN JOHNSON (CEO)
  • NINA WOODRUFF (DEPUTY CEO)
  • REGINA DAVIS (DEPUTY CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • CAROLYN JOHNSON (CEO): $299,640 total reported compensation
  • LANETHA OLIVER (COO): $198,573 total reported compensation
  • DEREK FLETCHER (DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC INITIATIVES): $116,029 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of the black cultural zone cdc is to unapologetically center black arts, culture, and economics as we collectively design, resource, transform, and build collective power for our communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Neighborhood services focuses on creating secure, high-vibrancy environments within our commercial hubs. This includes the deployment of safety corridor ambassadors to oversee community well-being and the strategic development of black-led commercial and cultural amenities designed to celebrate and sustain the local ecosystem. Our commercial real estate portfolio spans the full development lifecycle from the ground-up construction of vibrant market halls and affordable housing to the strategic acquisition and renovation of retail and mixed-use spaces along our most vital commercial corridors. These hubs serve as the heartbeat of our strategy to secure permanent space for our community. We provide a sanctuary for collective growth, where residents, business owners, artists, and makers can plant roots and flourish together.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 75% for direct work, and 25% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 33.2%; rating input score 33
  • Program expense ratio: 71.1%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $109.87 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 54.8%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.88; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.4%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 39.6% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 49.6% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 60.7% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 33.2% of revenue deployed · 71.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $6.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $300K · 15 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $122K reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 17 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.