Fashion Incubator San Francisco
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 452138021
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2013–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2021, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2012
- Location
- Belmont, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9172044980
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Employment Procurement Assistance
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,056
- Expenses
- $150,371
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JESSICA CHAPLIN BROWNING (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (THROUGH 2/2024))
- JEANINE BARNETT SILBERBLATT (BOARD PRESIDENT)
- DAN STEVENS (BOARD VICE PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- JESSICA CHAPLIN BROWNING (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (THROUGH 2/2024))
- JEANINE BARNETT SILBERBLATT (BOARD PRESIDENT)
- DAN STEVENS (BOARD VICE PRESIDENT)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To empower creative professionals to do what they love--for a living.
What it reported doing in 2024
The organization achieves its mission by: (i) accelerating emerging fashion designers with an entrepreneurial, innovative approach to business development; (ii) providing best-in-class forum for thought leadership, education, and innovation in a rapid changing industry; and (iii) convening a dynamic collective that provides our global community with support, opportunity, access, and inspiration. The organization wound down operations and dissolved with the California secretary of state on december 17, 2024 and distributed its remaining assets to the human rights foundation (an organization exempt from income tax under irc section 501(c)(3)).
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 44% for direct work, and 56% 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: 94
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 2
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 85.4%; rating input score 85
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -14,139.7%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.3%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 85.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $128K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2013 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.