International Forum of Visual Practitioners

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680415143
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2020, Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Rating
48
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Reported finances

Revenue
$33,624
Expenses
$75,997
Assets
$160,020

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sarah Spencer (President)

People named in this filing

  • Philip Bakelaar (Treasurer Chief Technical Officer)
  • Tul Lekutai (Director)
  • Winta Assefa Weldekiros (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

IFVP brings together diverse practitioners who use visual methods to assist learning and communication between groups and individuals. IFVP provides members and the visual practitioning community with valuable information and tools to effectively think and communicate visually.

What it reported doing in 2025

IFVP brings together diverse practitioners who use visual methods to assist learning andcommunication between groups and individuals. IFVP provides members and the visual practitioningcommunity with valuable information and tools to effectively think and communicate visually. IFVPholds a conference to accomplish this goal.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 66% 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. 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: 25
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 32.2%; rating input score 32
  • Program expense ratio: 14.3%; rating input score 14

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -126%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.11; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -146.6% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.5% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 32.2% of revenue deployed · 14.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $11K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 32/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.