Catchafire Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270649371
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
3474484014
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public, Society Benefit N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,346,500
Expenses
$1,341,373
Assets
$256,111
Liabilities
$372,100

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL DE LA ROCHA (PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR)
  • RACHAEL CHONG (INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • MICHAEL DE LA ROCHA (PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR)
  • KELLY DANE BRIGGS (TREASURER/DIRECTOR)
  • MARK NEWBERG (SECRETARY/DIRECTOR)

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

To match skilled volunteers to non-profit organizations.

What it reported doing in 2025

Catchafire foundation is contracting with catchafire inc. To provide a platform to connect nonprofits to professionals who want to donate their skills. Through a unique combination of technology and human support, the platform helps nonprofits articulate their needs in the form of prescoped, short term, virtual volunteer projects. The platform empowers nonprofits to select the professionals who are right for their projects and organizations. The professionals work with nonprofits on critical operational projects, such as creating a marketing strategy or building a new website. This allows the nonprofits to build their overall capacity and use their resources more effectively to create greater impact. Each match on the platform represents a meaningful connection and a rare opportunity for nonprofit and business professionals to work together and learn from one another. Through over 100+ different prescoped project types and a powerful matching process, the platform facilitates deep and meaningful engagements. Matches on the platform result in many volunteer professionals becoming supporters of the organization: as donors, mentors, social media advocates, repeat volunteers, and even board members. While a standard program grant might enable one organization to engage several volunteers, the funds for this project will enable hundreds of nonprofit organizations to more effectively attract, engage, and retain skilled, passionate community members as volunteers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 97.4%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.4%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.19; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.45; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97% of revenue deployed · 97.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.