Give Black Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
452734485
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2016, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Boston, MA, USA
Phone
8577723407
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Philanthropy, Charity, Voluntarism Promotion

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,522,230
Expenses
$858,554
Assets
$1,257,932
Liabilities
$57,895

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Bithiah Carter (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Bithiah Carter (President & CEO): $191,214 total reported compensation
  • Angela Johnson (Chief Operating Officer): $102,692 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to inform, reform, and transform the practice of philanthropy. We are bringing forth a paradigm shift in from focusing on black deficits to shining a light on our considerable potential and financial leverage in order to increase the assets in our communities with the power of black philanthropy. We are doing this by creating a strong alliance between funders and black communities. Along the way, we provide tools and resources to help foundations and other giving organizations make informed grant making decisions about their support in our communities

What it reported doing in 2024

Give Black Alliance

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 90% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 43.3%; rating input score 43
  • Program expense ratio: 76.8%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $25.27 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 56.5%; rating input score 56; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 43.6%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.47; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 34.2%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20.9% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 22.5% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 26.5% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 43.3% of revenue deployed · 76.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $660K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $191K · 8 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 31 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 56/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • 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.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.