Kinfolk Tech Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
823658329
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Brooklyn, NY, USA
Phone
6466597372
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,187,822
Expenses
$1,758,081
Assets
$3,709,167
Liabilities
$37,286

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • IDRIS BREWSTER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • MICAH NAHUM MILNER (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • IDRIS BREWSTER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $139,954 total reported compensation
  • MICAH NAHUM MILNER (VICE PRESIDENT): $139,147 total reported compensation
  • CARISSA ROMERO (DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS): $121,447 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To preserve, protect and share the erased histories for communities most impacted by displacement, violence and exclusion; allowing them to define their legacy and shape their future through partnerships, art and technology.

What it reported doing in 2024

Unsung -unsung is a multiplayer augmented reality learning experience about 2 black singers, florence mills and tiny davis, who rose above societal challenges to make their voices heard. Unsung takes a gamified approach to learning by allowing students to collaboratively explore immersive environments from history. Students will be able to read passages specific to each environment, fill in blanks in the text based on what they learn and find important historical artifacts along with primary source documents to analyze.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% 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 most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 40
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 21.6%; rating input score 22
  • Program expense ratio: 61.2%; rating input score 61
  • Fundraising efficiency: $32.22 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 71; 71st 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: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 66.1%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.11; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 29.6%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 21.3% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 60.9% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 56.7% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 21.6% of revenue deployed · 61.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $140K · 6 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $315K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 22/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.