GenUnity
Legal name: Genunity Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 871485598
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2021–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Boston, MA, USA
- Phone
- 9147149711
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community Improvement, Capacity Building N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,342,658
- Expenses
- $1,126,986
- Assets
- $663,795
- Liabilities
- $13,986
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JERREN CHANG (PRESIDENT)
- ILONA RABOVSKY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- JERREN CHANG (PRESIDENT): $111,077 total reported compensation
- ILONA RABOVSKY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $97,364 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Activating everyday adults to create a community by everyone for everyone.
What it reported doing in 2024
Health equity- genunity issue-focused community leadership programs (e.g., health equity in boston) center lived experience and connection, bringing together proximate experts who have experienced the issue firsthand and siloed experts working in institutions to address them.for both health equity and housing justice: over 10 weeks, 3 hours/week, 45-50 residents engage in facilitated sessions and small-group discussions with local partners, going through successive modules that build up their understanding of the issue:- people: members meet with patients, providers, and community leaders to hear about their experiences in the healthcare system, which in turn makes space for members to share about their own identities and lived experiences.- system: members engage with organizations in public, nonprofit, and private sectors to understand how the services they provide meet, or fail to meet, people's needs.- power: members talk to people in advocacy and political spaces to understand how decisions around funding and policy-making work.- change: members reflect on their learnings and map out avenues for change.
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
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 65
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 51
- Sustainability: 51
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 63%; rating input score 63
- Program expense ratio: 75%; rating input score 75
- Fundraising efficiency: $13.26 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
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: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 16.1%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.59; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 18.5%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 38.2% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 35.5% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 30.7% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 63% of revenue deployed · 75% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $846K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $111K · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 47/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.