Commit Boost Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
331349713
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
5304108934
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Support N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$508,505
Expenses
$406,252
Assets
$127,340
Liabilities
$1,792

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Andrew Van der Werff (CEO and Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Andrew Van der Werff (CEO and Director): $33,332 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Commit-Boost Inc. Commit-Boost aims to educate the public about and support and promote the development and adoption of open-source software particularly as related to blockchain technology. Through public education and community outreach as well as the development of free software and tools that enable easier adoption and understanding of new technologies Commit-Boost supports economic growth and general community welfare particularly among underserved and underprivileged individuals who would otherwise not have access to these opportunities resources and technologies. Commit-Boost furthers this purpose by: 1 providing free public education and information through writing research and community outreach 2 coordinating events and participating in community calls 3 developing open-source software and 4 performing fundraising operational and administrative activities.

What it reported doing in 2025

We now have a significant part of the community using our software. We went from near 0 traction to significant traction which was a huge accomplishment. We also received security audits and other items that provide further protections from those who rely on us.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
  • 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 90.2%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.1%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.31; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.2%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 137% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 136.5% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72% of revenue deployed · 90.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $366K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $33K · 5 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $232K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 35 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX ForeignGrants column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.