Innovative Future Collective

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
994968226
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2025465004
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$585,000
Expenses
$417,823
Assets
$156,271
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ASHLEY KENNEDY (FOUNDER/PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ASHLEY KENNEDY (FOUNDER/PRESIDENT)
  • TONYA FULKERSON (FOUNDER/BOARD MEMBER)
  • ELIZABETH JOHNSON (BOARD MEMBER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of innovative future collective (ifc) is be a nonpartisan forum to educate the public and policymakers about artificial intelligence, its applications across industries, and its implications for our future. Ifc's mission is to provide educational opportunities that are dynamic, hands-on, and grounded in real-world examples.

What it reported doing in 2025

Educational ai technology showcases and collaboration opportunities whereby ifc organizes events in Washington, dc, and other locations around the country, for ai experts and ai businesses to connect with the public and policy makers.

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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 40
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 59
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 35.6%; rating input score 36
  • Program expense ratio: 49.9%; rating input score 50
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 28.6%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.37; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 35.6% of revenue deployed · 49.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $208K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $179K reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 28/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.