Brooklyn Tech Alumni Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
112739496
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Brooklyn, NY, USA
Phone
7187972285
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Secondary, High School

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,337,012
Expenses
$1,985,957
Assets
$18,573,201
Liabilities
$136,965

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DENICE CLARKE WARE (PRESIDENT)
  • ANTHONY P SCHIRRIPA (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • BOLA OYEDIJO (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DAVID LEE (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • COURTNEY ULRICH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • COURTNEY ULRICH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $177,402 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 alumni foundation is to support brooklyn technical high school's continued educational excellence and national leadership as a specialized high school in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (stem) based education. The foundation seeks to engage all tech alumni and supporters in providing intellectual and financial resources to ensure the development of the next generation of future leaders. We support curriculum and facilities enhancements, faculty support and development and transformational learning experiences for students. We reconnect and engage alumni to support our educational programs and create and sustain partnerships with corporations, universities and industry to benefit brooklyn tech. We celebrate our history and strategically partner with brooklyn tech to sustain our legacy of excellence.

What it reported doing in 2024

1. Jeffrey m. Haitkin '62 faculty grants program providing over $3 million in more than 1,200 grants since its inception, in support of innovative instruction, specialized training, professional development, and enhanced educational experiences. The program is a partnership with the school administration and the parent association. 93 applications were received, and 75 grants totaling $158,450 were disbursed in fy25. Funding sources include temporary and permanently restricted funds.2. The brooklyn tech future world vision stem pathways consortium a ground-breaking initiative pairing brooklyn tech with seven brooklyn middle schools to utilize the american society of civil engineers' future world vision project to inspire students to pursue a stem education and related careers. Each of the middle schools has a stem champion teacher and an algebra initiative teacher who work with brooklyn tech stem leader teachers and a math coach. The total population of the consortium schools is 2,310 students with at least 70% of each middle school's population being african american or hispanic/latinx. An annual december consortium meeting at bths is held to bring together students, parents and faculty from each middle school. 310 brooklyn tech students and 15 brooklyn tech faculty participate as hosts and leaders. The program consists of an opening session, tours for students and parents, a parent session, stem academy workshops, and a closing session. An annual may consortium conference at bths to look back at the year, share student work and look to the next year. The opening session includes a welcome from a leader of the american society of civil engineers. Shsat prep - each school is encouraged to offer an shsat prep course. During fy2025 the alumni foundation sponsored an shsat prep scholarship program attended by 33 students from the consortium middle schools. Additionally, a math competition took place at brooklyn tech and 75 middle school students attended. 3. Leandro rizzuto '56 internship programs providing internship and volunteer opportunities to hundreds of students each year. We work with the school work based learning director to help provide over 300 internship experiences annually. Our brooklyn tech/ con edison internship program is a model. It provides a cohort of brooklyn tech rising seniors an exceptional summer internship experience. Last summer, 12 interns participated in the program. 4. Annual engineers' week: week of events centered on engineering and involves professionals and alumni. This program is possible through our partnership with brooklyn tech's chapter of the national society of black engineers (nsbe).5. Materials testing lab: we have repurposed an old shop into a state-of-the-art material testing lab to be used mostly by the civil engineering students. Other students using the lab will be from architecture, physics and industrial design. Furniture was installed and we have now begun to add state-of-the-art testing equipment that meets university and industry standards. A universal testing machine has been added to the lab and this lab is in current use. 6. Urban land institute: provide innovative projects for economics classes to create an understanding of urban development.7. The thomas volpe '53 urbanglass initiative offers brooklyn tech students majoring in industrial design a 9-week course of practical hands-on experience of the many different techniques using glass as a design medium. Conceived by alumnus thomas volpe '53, the program combines the technology of tech with the creativity of brooklyn-based glass center urbanglass, just a few blocks away from 29 fort greene place. A possible third collaboration with nearby st. Francis college's entrepreneurship program is being considered, introducing marketing and business elements to the program. 153 students participated in fy25.scholarships/awards: 55 scholarships/senior awards totaling $98,000 were disbursed to students for fye 6/30/2025.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 80% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.6%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 64.7%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.12 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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; 63rd 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: 15%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.35; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.9%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.2% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.6% of revenue deployed · 64.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $177K · 23 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $118K reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.