IDI

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
921532026
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Las Vegas, NV, USA
Phone
7028450753
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Civil Rights, Social Action, Advocacy N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$19,736
Expenses
$51,085
Assets
$1,499
Liabilities
$27,633

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LATOYA HOLMAN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ROBERT RUETER (EXECUTIVE DI)
  • LATOYA HOLMAN (PRESIDENT)
  • DAVID TORRES (SECRETARY)

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

To research and develop systems, tools, and best practices for designing more just, free, and fair societies.

What it reported doing in 2024

Idi works to encourage equality through the following avenues. Negotiate with conference management teams to increase access and participation with historicaly underrepresented communities. Developed a fellowship program to support, guide and amplify research and allied programing. Built and joined social impact alliances with non-profit social impact organizations and academic institutions. Advised, incubated, and accelerated approximately 30 social impact startups.

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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 12
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 55%; rating input score 55

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -158.8%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.03; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 18.43; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -28.6% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -84% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -110.7% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 55% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $28K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • Review — Grant Readiness: SAM / OFAC restrictions: this organization returned a name match close enough to need a human check before a grant is released.