Imagine Black
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 830781079
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2023
- Forms available
- Form 990 2023, Form 990-N 2018
- Location
- Beaverton, OR, USA
- Phone
- 5037649019
- Rating
- 64
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Civil Rights, Social Action, Advocacy N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $738,868
- Expenses
- $379,271
- Assets
- $728,297
- Liabilities
- $165,863
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOY ALISE DAVIS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- JOY ALISE DAVIS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $159,307 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Imagine black helps our black communities imagine the alternatives we deserve and build our political participation and leadership to achieve those alternatives.
What it reported doing in 2023
Focus: public safety campaign (policy & advocacy)during Oregon's 2024 legislative session, imagine black actively engaged in several coalitions to advocate for the protection of measure 110, a critical ballot measure that reclassified the possession of certain drugs as a civil violation and directed investments toward treatment and recovery services for drug addiction. While we were ultimately unable to secure the measure's protection, our efforts strengthened relationships with our supporters and kinfolk members, expanded awareness of its importance, and demonstrated our continued commitment to advancing equitable policies for our communities.
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 98% 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 most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 50
- Transparency & Controls: 74
- Accountability: 68
- Sustainability: 73
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 35.9%; rating input score 36
- Program expense ratio: 69.9%; rating input score 70
- Fundraising efficiency: $18.3 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- 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: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: 48.7%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.92; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.8%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 34.5% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 32.8% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 31.1% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 35.9% of revenue deployed · 69.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $265K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $159K · 8 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $235K reported
- Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2023
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 36/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 56/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.