Grip Training Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
901126510
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Berkeley, CA, USA
Phone
4154881348
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Rehabilitation Services for Offenders

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,040,667
Expenses
$2,699,525
Assets
$3,963,932
Liabilities
$1,189,667

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KIM GROSE MOORE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KIM GROSE MOORE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $187,785 total reported compensation
  • SARADA TANGIRALA (MARKETING & COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR): $113,015 total reported compensation
  • ALLEN JOHNSON (SENIOR ADVISOR, PARTNERSHIPS & GROWTH): $111,096 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The grip training institute is a community-based non-profit serving incarcerated and formerly incarcerated people and those who have survived violence. Grip stands for guiding rage into power, which is the name of our flagship program, an evidence-based methodology developed over 25 years of work with thousands of incarcerated people and many victims/survivors. Rooted in restorative justice principles, the program's trauma-informed model integrates cutting-edge neuroscience research. Students engage in a yearlong, in-depth journey to comprehend the origins of their violence and develop skills to track and manage strong impulses rather than acting out in harmful ways. They transform destructive beliefs and behaviors into an attitude of emotional intelligence that prevents re-victimization.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provide the grip (guiding rage into power) program to incarcerated people in ca state prisons, including offering aftercare support for graduates of the program in prison and in re-entry, to sustain impact.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 75% 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.
  • 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 42.5%; rating input score 43
  • Program expense ratio: 60.5%; rating input score 61
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.26 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 33.2%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.47; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.4%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.2% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 27.8% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.7% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 42.5% of revenue deployed · 60.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $188K · 12 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 41/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.