Ella Baker Center Action Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
870854606
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oakland, CA, USA
Phone
5104283939
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy

Reported finances

Revenue
$283,872
Expenses
$206,526
Assets
$282,385
Liabilities
$153,134

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SHIREE TENG (PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARLENE SANCHEZ (SECRETARY AND DIRECTOR): $186,875 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Ella baker center action fund (the "fund") will work with policymakers, families, and allied organizations to advocate for legislation that promotes dignity and provides opportunity for communities that historically have been excluded in policy considerations, including disenfranchised black and brown communities and overlooked families with low or no incomes. The fund is focused on advocating for legislation addressing public health issues and the reallocation of resources from punitive criminalizing systems toward infrastucture that supports healing, accountability, and opportunity, especially in communities most harmed by historic and ongoing racial and economic injustice.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community outreach and engagement. The fund organizes black, brown, and low-income communities to discuss policy and legislative issues. Through individual or small group discussions, organizers provide educational information to the public and identify community members interested in participating in empowering their communities.

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 95% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 62
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.2%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 73.1%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 50th 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 27.2%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.37; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.54; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.9%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 50.8% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 52.2% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 34.3% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.2% of revenue deployed · 73.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $151K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $187K · 5 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.