Bradley Impact Fund
Legal name: Bradley Impact Fund Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 454678325
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2021
- Location
- Milwaukee, WI, US
- Phone
- (414) 291-2500
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $79,496,121
- Expenses
- $51,939,561
- Assets
- $200,316,165
- Liabilities
- $2,049,785
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- GABRIEL CONGER (PRESIDENT)
- KALA HILL (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- GABRIEL CONGER (PRESIDENT): $315,400 total reported compensation
- KALA HILL (VICE PRESIDENT): $189,903 total reported compensation
- SHERRY STREET (SENIOR PHILANTHROPIC ADVISOR): $182,096 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To serve as advisors who help educate, empower, and inspire donors to advance our values through high-impact giving and the protection of donor intent.
What it reported doing in 2024
The bradley impact fund provides funding to organizations that research public policy and educate the public on policy issues. The organization's board of directors select organizations for grants and assistance based upon a rigorous examination process that includes an analysis of the organization's effectiveness in its field of interest; the organization's creativity and past results; the potential of focused, special projects; the organization's accountability and transparency with funds; appropriateness of the activities under section 501(c)(3); and relevant factors pertaining to each organization.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 96% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 80
- Transparency & Controls: 81
- Accountability: 94
- Sustainability: 86
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 67.7%; rating input score 68
- Program expense ratio: 96.6%; rating input score 97
- Fundraising efficiency: $156.16 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 28th 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: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 99.4%; rating input score 99; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: 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: 34.7%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.86; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.6%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 28.4% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 29.1% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 34.8% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 67.7% of revenue deployed · 96.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $50.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $315K · 13 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $438K reported
- Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 406 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 400 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.
- 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 — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.