Institute for Strategic and Equitable Development

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
475672323
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Charleston, SC, USA
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,569,700
Expenses
$1,280,102
Assets
$1,239,866
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CELIA NAYLOR (BOARD PRESIDENT)
  • AMANDA STOREY (BOARD VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CELIA NAYLOR (BOARD PRESIDENT): $64,125 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To promote impactful grant making, investments and economic development in communities of color through strategic planning, evaluation, project management and technical assistance services.

What it reported doing in 2025

Ised continued events for the sankofa series (as part of the presidents forum) to strategize and respond to post-affirmative action legislation (including recent shifts in support for dei programs, etc.). After completing the third season of the r.a.c.e. Podcast in 2024, which centered on a range of topics on equity, power, culture and leadership in philanthropy, a book and audiobook (entitled hear us know: racial equity in the workplace) were created and widely published in 2025 via audiobrary and other platforms. Ised also continued its collaborative project race, healing, and joy: centering black reproductive justice leadership. Ised worked with a new partner (harmonia rosales studio) on the 2025 educational tour for the chronicles of ori book project.

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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.4%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 88.8%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 18.4%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.97; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.4% of revenue deployed · 88.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $64K · 3 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $1M reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.