Impact Cubed

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
832215503
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Encinitas, CA, USA
Phone
7604317949
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$714,405
Expenses
$1,693,793
Assets
$1,088,881
Liabilities
$26,602

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • CHARLENE SEIDLE (CHAIR): $373,180 total reported compensation
  • LEILANI RASMUSSEN (TREASURER): $294,567 total reported compensation
  • SHARYN GOODSON (SECRETARY): $275,816 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To stimulate philanthropy and build social sector capacity by providing guidance to donors, facilitating funder consortia, and engaging community groups. Efforts will be primarily dedicated to enhancing impact, building talent, and nurturing equity in jewish

What it reported doing in 2024

Philanthropic consulting: impact cubed consultants offer time-testedskills to incubate, develop, and manage capacity building projects andinitiatives in consultation with foundations, nonprofits, and networkorganizations. This includes organizing and facilitating board, familyor community meetings; creating governance strategy and materials; facilitating research; assessing community needs and donor interests toinform grant strategies; developing, managing, and evaluatinggrantmaking programs; advising on multi-generation approaches andengaging younger generations of donors.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 69% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 66% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most filed governance safeguards are in place. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 96
  • Transparency & Controls: 59
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 96.4%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: $44.7 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.6%; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 12th 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -137.1%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.64; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.2%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.6% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.1% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $373K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.