Families in Action for Quality Education
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 870829250
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2021–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Oakland, CA, USA
- Phone
- 5102030712
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alliance/Advocacy Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,297,559
- Expenses
- $1,265,391
- Assets
- $224,841
- Liabilities
- $19,799
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Kimi Kean (CEO and Co-Founder)
Highest reported compensation
- Maribel Gonzalez (Board Chair): $87,800 total reported compensation
- Kimi Kean (CEO and Co-Founder): $35,498 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
FIA was founded to protect access to quality public schools through elevating authentic parent and youth leadership.Families in Action for Quality Education (FIA) empowers Black, Brown, and low-income families in Oakland to advocate for equitable access to high-quality public education. Grounded in the belief that "the people most impacted by the problem should be at the decision-making tables," FIA builds family power by equipping parents and youth with organizing skills, leadership training, and advocacy tools to achieve policy and practice wins at the school and citywide levels.
What it reported doing in 2024
FIA trains and mobilizes family leaders at two levels: Grassroots: Families engage fellow parents in their classrooms and schools, strengthening local leadership and advocacy.Grass-tops: FIA leaders influence elected officials and policymakers through research meetings, public actions, and campaigns that push for systemic educational reforms.FIA structures campaigns to address key inequities in Oakland public education, focusing on literacy, college eligibility, and resource allocation.1. A-G College Eligibility CampaignFIA empowers students and parents to close the racial gap in A-G eligibility, ensuring college readiness for Black and Brown students. OUSD High School Superintendent integrated FIA's campaign demands into district goals (2024-25).1,100 students participated in FIA's student-led A-G workshops. Understanding of A-G requirements increased from 34% to 88%. Awareness of individual A-G status rose from 41% to 88%. FIA hosted a nationally live-streamed A-G Roundtable featuring OUSD leaders, educators, and student advocates.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 87
- Transparency & Controls: 85
- Accountability: 75
- Sustainability: 32
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 97.2%; rating input score 97
- Program expense ratio: 99.6%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 98.2%; rating input score 98; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 16th 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: 2.5%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.18; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.7%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 20.9% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 20.5% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 97.2% of revenue deployed · 99.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $88K · 10 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $131K reported
- Consistency: 28 of 30 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 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: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 44/100.