Future Tech Leaders
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 932294901
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2023–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Atlanta, GA, USA
- Rating
- 53
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Youth Development Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $10,500
- Expenses
- $3,000
- Assets
- $7,500
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
People named in this filing
- Portia Mathis (Board of Directors)
- Shanelle Smith (Board of Director)
- Ray Martin (Board of Direct)
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 and inspire youth by providing early exposure to technology through hands-on learning experiences in tech,-preparing students from diverse backgrounds to pursue technology careers and achieve economic mobility.
What it reported doing in 2024
Future Tech Leaders hosted Kids Tech Day and Tech Workshops engaging students ages in hands-on workshops covering cybersecurity, artificial intelligence, and data analytics. The event introduced youth to real-world technology applications and career paths while encouraging creativity and problem-solving. Over 100 students participated in interactive lessons led by industry volunteers.
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 100% 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 12
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 80
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 6.2%; rating input score 6
- Program expense ratio: 21.7%; rating input score 22
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 71.4%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.5; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 133.3% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 200% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 6.2% of revenue deployed · 21.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $650 in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 6/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 22/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.