Indienomicon Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 834319389
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2023–2023
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2022
- Location
- Orlando, FL, USA
- Rating
- 63
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alliance/Advocacy Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $63,752
- Expenses
- $67,723
- Assets
- $6,946
- Liabilities
- $17,248
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
People named in this filing
- Kunal Patel (Director)
- Isabella Johnston (Director)
- Adrian Lannon (Director)
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 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The organizations primary exempt purpose is to advance education and public benefit through innovation technology and creative computing. The organization provides hands-on educational programs workshops hackathons and community events that promote experiential learning workforce development mentorship and access to technology for students professionals and underrepresented communities.
What it reported doing in 2023
Conducted hands-on innovation technology and game-development programs including hackathons workshops and community events designed to educate students professionals and underrepresented groups. Programs provided experiential learning mentorship and public-interest technology exposure. Persons benefited estimated 300
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 72% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 57
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 27
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 59.6%; rating input score 60
- Program expense ratio: 51.7%; rating input score 52
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -6.2%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.1; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.48; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 59.6% of revenue deployed · 51.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $35K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.