Gear Up Alumni Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
862297321
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Westlake Vlg, CA, USA
Rating
39
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alumni Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$29,094
Expenses
$53,430
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$10,946

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Bobby Holder (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Bobby Holder (Executive Director)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Purpose of this corporation shall be to develop an alumni network that supports and advocates for the overall advancement of the GEAR UP community through lifelong mentorship philanthropy and career development and to carry on other charitable activities associated with this purpose as allowed by law.

What it reported doing in 2025

Mentorship: Weve established and provided a mentorship program spanning over 20 states for all levels of education for students including high school college and GEAR UP alumni already in their careers. Alumni professionals mentor students finishing up their last years of college to advise on navigating the workforce after graduation. College-attending alumni mentor students entering institutions of higher education to help overcome hurdles such as impostor syndrome time management and navigating the system. Early college students mentor our youngest students currently 8th and 9th graders on how to navigate high school and prepare for college.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 82
  • Sustainability: 12
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 14.5%; rating input score 15
  • Program expense ratio: 7.9%; rating input score 8

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -83.6%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -86.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -74.3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -200% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 14.5% of revenue deployed · 7.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $4K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 15/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.