Families in Action for Justice

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
870997258
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Oakland, CA, USA
Phone
5102030712
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,500
Expenses
$77,226
Assets
$79,987
Liabilities
$120

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kimi Kean (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Kimi Kean (CEO): $35,498 total reported compensation
  • Tunisia Harris (Director): $1,000 total reported compensation
  • Katya Caballero (Director): $1,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Families in Action for Justice (FIA4J) was founded in 2021 to empower parents, youth, and educators to advocate for educational equity and civic engagement. Through leadership development, voter education, and grassroots organizing, FIA4J strengthens Black and Brown family voices in shaping public education policies and outcomes. Our mission is to increase civic power and ensure that families and students from historically underserved communities have the tools, knowledge, and influence to drive systemic change in education and governance.

What it reported doing in 2024

Social Welfare Program Service AccomplishmentsProvided training so that 50-100 parent and students leaders per year understand how local elections work and the importance promoting widespread understanding and involvement. Developed the leadership of parent and youth leaders in the Civic Engagement Campaign through 1:1 coaching from organizers. Supported parents and youth to lead voter education workshops in their schools, to conduct outreach and recruitment for the candidate forums and to conduct research action meetings with candidates for school board and city council to understand their values, priorities and platform. Developed educational blogs that inform about the upcoming elections and provide information to promote voter registration and voting.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 80% for direct work, and 20% for grants.

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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 95.1%; rating input score 95
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2,989%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.04; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.6%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -147.5% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -58.2% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 95.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $73K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $35K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.