City Dibs Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
834679614
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-N 2020
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
5108786558
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$394,890
Expenses
$2,278,828
Assets
$394,068
Liabilities
$1,050

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • B COLE (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • AISHA PEW (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • RYANN HOLMES (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • B COLE (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $150,000 total reported compensation
  • AISHA PEW (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $150,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We support leaders of color to cultivate intentional community and economic sovereignty. We invest in communities that historically struggle to maintain vibrant economies. We provide support for businesses, social justice organizations, community land trusts, grassroots urban plans.

What it reported doing in 2024

City dibs lgbtq permaculture and land stewardship hub is centered around environmental sustainability and collective leadership. Over 70 leaders were trained in organizing and land stewardship in 2023. And over 100 leaders were served through our online wellness community, a dedicated virtual space where lgbtq people of color receive ongoing support, education, and coacing to sustain their mental, emotional, and physical well-being. Designed specifically for activists, movement leaders and healers, this community provides a refuge from the daily stressors of systemic oppression, activism burnout, and isolation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 84% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 51% for direct work, and 49% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 12
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 90.6%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.65 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -477.1%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.17; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.2%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 58.7% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.9% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 24.5% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 90.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $150K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 22 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 10 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.