Iam Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 932685157
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Scottsdale, AZ, USA
- Phone
- 6025292968
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Research Institutes and Public Policy Analysis
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $176,430
- Expenses
- $93,426
- Assets
- $88,966
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Robb Smith (Director, President)
- Josh Leonard (Director, Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Robb Smith (Director, President)
- Josh Leonard (Director, Vice President)
- Lana Bolotina (Director, Treasurer)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The purpose of the IAM Foundation is to fund the application of integrative metatheories to liberate transformational potential in important social contexts.
What it reported doing in 2024
Launch of IAMF and several new Applied Metatheory Initiatives to research and apply Complex Integral Realism to large-scale social problems, including in the philanthropy fields.
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 88% 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 total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 63
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 70
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 47.3%; rating input score 47
- Program expense ratio: 89.3%; rating input score 89
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 47%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.95; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 60.2%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 47.3% of revenue deployed · 89.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $83K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 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 47/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.