Blackspace Urbanist Collective Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
834620589
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Brooklyn, NY, USA
Phone
3019103078
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Cultural, Ethnic Awareness

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,078,742
Expenses
$741,209
Assets
$585,757
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • KENYADA MCLEAN (COMANAGING DIRECTOR): $102,763 total reported compensation
  • EMMA O OSORE (COMANAGING DIRECTOR): $100,390 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

BlackSpace's mission is to bridge gaps between people, place, and power to realize racial justice with Black communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

We facilitate opportunities for Black urbanists to co-create social and spatial change (and get imaginative) in partnership with Black communities through the following three pillars of work: Neighborhood Strategy: Co-design projects that acknowledge, affirm and amplify Black presence. Customized Learning: Deliver workshops to share methods of centering Black culture and people within place-based development. Community: Build the capacities of Black urbanists to craft restorative & inspiring urbanist experiences, integrate traditional design and urban planning through published content, and transform their urbanist practice through Manifesto-based projects.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 32
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.2%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 77.4%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $22.17 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 1st 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: 10%; rating input score 10; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 31.3%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.4%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 28.4% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.6% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.2% of revenue deployed · 77.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 20 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $585K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $103K · 20 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 21 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 10/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D expense reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.