Blaque

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
856279230
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Kansas City, MO, USA
Phone
8162044328
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,975,016
Expenses
$2,766,487
Assets
$4,810,347
Liabilities
$4,048

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR COKETHEA HILL (PRESIDENT/FOUNDER)

People named in this filing

  • DR COKETHEA HILL (PRESIDENT/FOUNDER)
  • JERON RAVIN (BOARD CHAIR)
  • FRANK WHITE III (BOARD TREASURER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Black leaders advancing quality urban education (blaque) is an organization committed to significantly improving the academic, economic, social, emotional and life outcomes of african american children in public schools.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025, BLAQUE KC continued its nationally recognized Charter School Board Draft and Governance Academy initiatives, supporting the recruitment and training of community leaders for public charter school boards. The organization also deepened investments in high-performing and emerging schools, convened cross-sector education leaders through TEACH KC to strengthen the teacher-of-color pipeline, and led community-centered policy and advocacy efforts focused on educational equity, accountability, and long- term systems transformation across Kansas City.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.5%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 75.2%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.74; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 43.7% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 36.7% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 47.6% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.5% of revenue deployed · 75.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.