Black Economic Alliance Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
833790370
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2027886888
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$22,891,381
Expenses
$8,814,333
Assets
$28,908,498
Liabilities
$2,727,171

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • N ANTHONY COLES JR (DIRECTOR, PRESIDENT)
  • SAMANTHA TWEEDY (CHIEF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • ALAINA BEVERLY (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • SAMANTHA TWEEDY (CHIEF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $484,599 total reported compensation
  • ALAINA BEVERLY (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT): $272,004 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 organization focuses on advancing economic progress in black communities by supporting research, education, and public policy development around work, wages, and wealth in the black community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Center for black entrepreneurship - the black economic alliance foundation, spelman college, and morehouse college have partnered to develop the center for black entrepreneurship (cbe), the first-ever academic center of its kind to produce, train, and support a new classof black entrepreneurial talent.the cbe seeks to eliminate the access barrier between black entrepreneurs, professional investors, and business builders by leveraging education, mentorship, access to capital, and opportunity.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 69% for direct work, and 31% 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 33.6%; rating input score 34
  • Program expense ratio: 84.9%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $56.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • 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: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 61.5%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.28; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.7%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 40.9% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 38.4% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 49.9% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 33.6% of revenue deployed · 84.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $7.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $485K · 14 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.3M reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 9 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 34/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.