In Our Backyards Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263283639
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Brooklyn, NY, USA
Phone
9174644515
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,035,181
Expenses
$5,020,069
Assets
$1,303,950
Liabilities
$174,066

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ERIN BARNES (COFOUNDER & CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • HANNA ZAHORY (CFO): $70,948 total reported compensation
  • ERIN BARNES (COFOUNDER & CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $29,755 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Ioby mobilizes neighbors who have good ideas to become powerful civic leaders who plan, fund, and make positive change in their own neighborhoods.

What it reported doing in 2023

Project outreach & sourcing: this program comprises all of the activities and initiatives we design and manage in order to provide outreach and source new projects that use ioby to connect with potential donors and volunteers. This includes all our on-the-ground organizers that we have in detroit, cleveland, and cincinnati, as well as events and communications to keep donors involved and up to date with projects they have supported. We also host outreach activities to promote the work of our projects to the broader community of interested community activists and neighborhood leaders. We have built strong relationships with hundreds of local community groups and nonprofits across the country, supported thousands of residents shaping their ideas into more than 3,555 projects and since our founding we have directed more than $19m from more than 50,000 donors.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 41% for direct work, and 59% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.3%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 70.1%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.51 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 86.6%; rating input score 87; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -24.4%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.26; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.4% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.3% of revenue deployed · 70.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $71K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 102 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 97 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 28/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.