Global Blockchain Business Council - USA

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
831417845
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2028203389
Rating
38
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,803,435
Expenses
$2,543,036
Assets
$863,616
Liabilities
$200,695

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sandra Ro (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Sandra Ro (CEO): $191,825 total reported compensation
  • Paul Rapino (Chief Growth Officer): $171,875 total reported compensation
  • Sierra Lewis (Director of Community): $103,211 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The global blockchain business council-USA (gbbc USA) is the leading association for the blockchain technology ecosystem. The organization brings together innovators and thought-leaders from over 50 countries to further adoption of the blockchain technology by engaging and educating regulators, business leaders and lawmakers on how to harness the groundbreaking technology to create more secure, equitable and functional societies.

What it reported doing in 2022

The global blockchain business council-USA, in conjunction with the congressional blockchain caucus, hosted "demo day on which brought together enterprises and start-ups behind today's most innovative and timely blockchain solutions. The event featured demonstrations across arange of sectors, including e-governance, financial services, supplychain, energy and more. This event was open to the public.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 71% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 32
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.3%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.34; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.4%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 33% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 2 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $192K · 3 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 12 of 14 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay and related organizations
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2020 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.