Hillman Grad Foundation Inc C/o Neuman Associates

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
852727976
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Encino, CA, USA
Phone
8189959000
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$708,200
Expenses
$251,760
Assets
$463,740
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LENA WAITHE (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • RISHI RAJANI (DIRECTOR)
  • NINA SHAW (DIRECTOR)
  • LENA WAITHE (PRESIDENT)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To provide education to aspiring writers, directors, producers, and actors and providing aid and alleviating hardship for those in need.

What it reported doing in 2024

Through hillman mentorship, the foundation will work with aspiring writers, directors, producers, and actors in annual cohorts where they will be seen, heard, and supported to achieve their goals. The foundation will provide mentorship and educational classes along with experiential learning, such as by funding the production of short films that will allow aspiring directors to gain directorial experience. The foundation may eventually establish an artist residency program to provide resources such as workspace, housing, workshops, collaboration opportunities, production support, exhibition space, and funding for emerging artists in the film and television industry.

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 revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 27
  • Sustainability: 83
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 35.4%; rating input score 35
  • Program expense ratio: 99.5%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 25%; rating input score 25; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 64.5%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.84; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -65.7% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 33% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 76.9% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 35.4% of revenue deployed · 99.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $250K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 35/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 25/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.